Loan Modification VS Mailing The Keys To Bank

One of my favorite blogs about the housing crisis in California (with data similar in many markets) talks often about the homeowners who are Upside-Down on their mortgage: ie: owing more than the house is worth. And, for many home owners it isn't just `a little' upside-down -- it's to the tune of 100's of thousands of dollars. And, like most Americans - so far - they have tried to keep up with payments and to keep their homes.

But, what is the likely outcome of doing so? Well, this link http://housing-kaboom.blogspot.com/2009/06/loan-mod-vs-walking-away.html explains the problem in realistic terms that - for sure - your bank doesn't want you to hear, read, or think about. From this article:

"Family 1, has a 500k ARM and wants to do a loan mod. They get a mod locking the rate at 4% for 5 years. Payments are $2400 plus tax and insurance for a total of around $3000 per month. In 5 years they will have paid $144,000 with little of that being principal. At the end of five years they will still owe $452k and the payments will reset to 7% taking it to $3007/mo, plus tax and insurance for a total of roughly 3600/mo. At the end of 5 years, family # 1 is still $200k upside down, trapped and unable to sell, and unless their income rose they still might be facing foreclosure.Family #2 also has a $500k loan on a house worth $250k. They however choose to send the keys to the bank and move into a recently purchased foreclosure rental. They rent a similar home for $1800/mo. The net difference in total monthly payments between family 1 and family 2 is roughly $1200/mo. Family 2 saves this $1200/mo and after 5 years has $72k in the bank. After 5 years their credit is good and they can once again buy. They purchase a home similar to family one's home for $250k using 20% down (50K), they finance $200k at 7% for monthly payment of $1350 plus tax and insurance or roughly $1900/mo.After 5 years both families own similar homes:Family 1 owes $450k and has a payment of $3600/mo.Family 2 owes $200k and has a payment of $1900/mo. That's $1700/mo less and they owe $250k less on the home. If they were to apply that extra $1700 to their monthly payments they would pay off the home in about 7 years!!"

As he goes on in the article - this isn't even the worst case scenario - as prices could continue to slide even further. Now, shouldn't the Bank - the one who sold you a bill of goods that the house was `worth' the inflated amount take the hit - rather than yourself?

More links for today:

The website, Chikii.com, surveyed hundreds of women nationwide between the ages of 25 and 60 years old. Out of that group, 52% admitted to using marijuana at least ten times a year. 27% smoked between one and seven times a week. And 78% of those women knew someone who got high on a regular basis http://www.momlogic.com/2009/06/marijuana_mamas.php?adid=aolws_062609&icid=mainhtmlws-maindl3link5http%3A%2F%2Fwww.momlogic.com%2F2009%2F06%2Fmarijuana_mamas.php%3Fadid%3Daolws_062609 High Moms --- will female activists be the ones that finally turn the laws around?

Sine Wave Google Searches - http://cryptogon.com/?p=9526 A very interesting read about a search on Google Trends that turned out to look like a sine-wave -- problem is -- there is no reason it should look that way. Two minute read.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sheeple Find out the origin of this political term.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2009_Shishou_riot OMG. Did you know that China has had some VERY recent - full scale - RIOTS? Could the reason you haven't heard of this is because THEY HAVE ALL OUR MONEY AND OUR GOVERNMENT IS IMPOTENT TO DO ANYTHING OR SAY ANYTHING?

http://theheavystuff.com/ My esoteric blog.

The Michael Jackson Ruse

Am I the only one somewhat offended by the amount of coverage given to Michael Jackson's death? I mean, while he did break down some barriers with the Thriller album, and, produced an Oh My God moment with the first moonwalk dance move - isn't this a little overdone?

That said, he did breakdown another thing too -- he showed that a black man's money will `buy' justice too in America - both in the molestation trial he won and the one that he settled for millions. Indeed, he proved black money will buy `justice' even before O.J. did. And, he proved that EVEN child molesters can be `forgiven' within the big media - if they are interesting enough and can provide ratings. Jackson also proved that a black man can be nearly half a billion in debt too.

And, what a slam dunk for the media - no longer having to apologize for not having any real contacts in Iran - and getting that nasty - no one wants to think about story (Iran election and violence) off the tube. No tough questions for President Obama or any representative. And, finally, another break from having to talk about bad unemployment numbers - those nasty facts that keep putting toxins on the green shoots - and North Korea.

But, all this media talk and remorse for a fading star record maker, probable child molester, in debt a half billion dollars, who died of a probable misuse of hard drugs - is a little much for me. Heck, would an Israeli bombing of an Iran nuke site even make the news at this time?

More links for today:

Marijuana Fear-Mongering and Misinformation - http://watchingthewatchers.org/indepth/11796/arent-we-past The article asks if we are past using fear and misinformation about drugs to reduce use --- NO is the answer of course.

Waterboarding used on pot suspects, says London police officer - http://www.boingboing.net/2009/06/24/waterboarding-used-o.html It is a war for sure.

Unemployment Rate: A Visual Guide to the Financial Crisis - http://www.mint.com/blog/finance-core/a-visual-guide-to-the-financial-crisis-unemployment-rates/ Only once in a while does the media try to give real info - here's an example. Of course it's a NON big media site.

For today's fun link:
http://www.shorpy.com/node/6364?size=_original Montreal in 1900

Real Heavy Politics - Today's Links

http://www.badscience.net/2009/06/this-is-my-column-this-is-my-column-on-drugs-any-questions/ Great article on how the government IGNORES the scientific evidence about drugs to `push' the drug agenda it has. Three minute read.

http://iliveinabox.com/marijuana-and-jury-nullification/ Marijuana and jury nullification - make sure to forward this to a friend.

Real Heavy Politics - Today's Links

Legalize Drunk Driving http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/drunkdriving.html Believe it or not - lots of good valid points are raised in this older article - worth the two minutes read.

http://www.marijuana.com/drug-war-headline-news/122080-ca-budget-bleeds-state-begging-cash-crop.html As the article says - the states are begging for more revenue.

Barney Frank Says Sheeple Should Be Limited To 3.5 Ounces Of Legal Pot - Should Drinkers Have Home Limitations of Ten Cases Of Beer?

(Let me say upfront that `political advocates for marijuana' may not like my attitude in this post - but - then again - I bet they voted for a democrap or a republinut in 08 for President.)

As you know, this is not the first time I've criticized `pot reform' http://realheavypolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/maines-new-marijuana-law-isnt-enough.html - but, the move by Frank is indeed typical of the nearly worthless politicians we have in D.C. And, indeed, the second part of the legislation is even funnier - the transfer of up to an ounce for NO PROFIT - would also not carry a penalty. I mean, if it wasn't funny to laugh at stupidity, one could only cry instead.

Lots of NO PROFIT transfers out there - right?

And, these legal 3.50 ounces -- they come from the CRIMINAL person with a pound - right? Wasn't it said in the 70's that a ton was nothing but a million joints?

Does Barney Frank view Budweiser or other manufacturers as CRIMINALS?

The politicians simply will NEVER get it - especially FRANK. These half step measures only perpetuate the common consensus that some criminal is at the top of the pack. I and millions of others don't buy that.

What do you think?

More links of interest this week:

Push to legalize pot gains momentum in United States - http://www.tuscaloosanews.com/article/20090616/NEWS/906159895/1007?Title=Push-to-legalize-pot-gains-momentum-in-United-States Has a great map of US and where the laws currently stand about pot.

THC initiates brain cancer cells to destroy themselves - http://www.worldhealth.net/news/thc_initiates_brain_cancer_cells_to_dest From a couple weeks ago.

http://losangelesmarijuanaclinic.com/2009/05/pot-kills-cancer-cells/

And - today's entertainment - an oldtime Shorpy's picture from 1942 of a coal-miner at the end of his shift http://www.shorpy.com/node/6318?size=_original

Real Heavy Politics - Today's Links

Suitcase With $134 Billion Puts Dollar on Edge: William Pesek http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=a62_boqkurbI About two hours ago - a spokesperson from the Public Debt office (?) said the bonds were fake. HMM.

http://yurock.net/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=145:at-the-nuclear-power-plant&catid=34:pictures&Itemid=53 Pictures inside a nuke plant - you have to see the `button board'.

See you tomorrow.

If Government Arrested 800,000 Tobacco Smokers A Year - Would 21% Smoke?

Yesterday, I ran a link to a Ron Paul piece about the possible prohibition of Tobacco by our nearly worthless politicians. And, while I doubt that it will happen (after all, Chicago-Cook County in Illinois gets 2.68 PER pack in taxes) - it got me to thinking about countries that prohibit naturally occurring plants that have been used for centuries if not millennia by the everyday man. Indeed, North American tribes thought tobacco "was a gift from the Creator and that the exhaled tobacco smoke was capable of carrying one's thoughts and prayers to heaven." (Wiki)


But, our worthless politicians, are in love with DRUGS - not natural products.

And, Mr. Paul's piece made me think about how tobacco smokers would react if suddenly over 2,000 of them were arrested each and everyday and then thrust into the legal system. Suddenly, 1,000's each day would get to see the inside of a local jail cell. Some would even end up in Federal prison. Suddenly, thousands of them, each day would be put onto `probation' by a judge of the law for their `crime' - with the promise of a jail term if they messed up and were caught with tobacco again. A few, might even get their kids taken away or lose their home to forfeiture.

For sure, we could count on the politicians patting themselves on their collective backs. They would tell us how they were protecting us - and - that THEY know what is best for us and our KIDS. They would talk of the reduced health problems that America will have in the future and the great gains in productivity they are providing by prohibiting the drug. They will NOT talk about a loss of liberty or the right for adults to self medicate. And, the media - somewhat dependent on political ads every 2 years - would rah-rah the whole thing.

Indeed, one has to wonder if tobacco smokers would continue to use `their drug of choice'. And, one has to wonder if the tobacco smokers would realize that THEY should have spoken up about the millions of cannabis smoker arrests, jail time, and billions of dollars the smokers had to spend to defend the right of an adult to choose what is best for them.

And, what a BOON tobacco prohibition would be for the lawyers (big supporters of the political parties) and their industry. Perhaps a country gets what it deserves when 1,000,000+ of them are lawyers. I just hope that the tobacco smokers don't expect the cannabis users to speak up for them.

How about you?

More links for today:

Readers disagree with charges against pot dispensary operator -- http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/comments_blog/2009/06/weed-pot-drugs-marijuana.html#comments Yep, the worthless politicians still put folks in jail in California for it - maybe they can release a rapist early for good behaviour to make room.

Rhode Island overwhelmingly overrides governor’s veto of dispensaries! - http://stash.norml.org/breaking-rhode-island-overwhelmingly-overrides-governors-veto-of-dispensaries/ You learn something everyday - such as - the governor of R.I. is another worthless politician.

Alcohol is toxic and potentially lethal. Marijuana is NOT. - http://safercampuses.org/alcohol-vs-marijuana.html Don't miss the `drug chart' near the bottom of this article.

http://physicsitsgreat.blogspot.com/ Today's FUN link - you have to see the cats on a treadmill.

Moving Towards Tobacco Prohibition?

What once seemed impossible - tobacco prohibition - may be becoming a real possibility. Read Ron Paul's thoughts on it here http://www.infowars.com/moving-towards-tobacco-prohibition/.

The strip club recession - http://www.lewrockwell.com/french/french118.html - this is an eye opener for sure. Great two minute read.

Minuteman group arrested for murdering family http://trueslant.com/jeffhoard/2009/06/14/minuteman-group-arrested-for-murdering-family/ Yes, the Minuteman Group.

The WHO cocaine report the US didn't want you to see --http://transform-drugs.blogspot.com/2009/06/report-they-didnt-want-you-to-see.html It's the ultimate government nightmare -- cocaine isn't that harmful says this report.

Who Is More Vapid - Pelosi or Palin?

According to the dictionary - vapid: woman, obsessed by her own elegance; lacking force ...... syn: insipid................. insipid: lacking in qualities of interest

As you may know, I dislike the positioning of both `major' parties - so, it shouldn't be a surprise that I find little to like about candidates of either party. But, I have to say, few on either side get under my skin like Pelosi or Palin.

Both, to me, seem -- beyond empty. Beyond a smidgen of realness. Both seem like a caricature more than a person. Both of their very voices bothers me. How they have come to represent the best that the female of our American public has put into areas of leadership is incomprehensible and worrisome.

Just my two cents - feel free to comment.

More links to consider:

"Jim Parsons, who originally broke the story, was in Superior Court for the arguments. At issue: How many letters to borough officials does it take to constitute a crime?" http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/19706138/detail.html Evidently, about 350. Two minute read.

"Nuclear blasts’ toll lingers for one man" http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2009/jun/11/nuclear-blasts-toll-lingers-for-one-man/ The interesting thing about this story is that the government, on purpose, exposed these soldiers to A-Bombs to harden them. It is also interesting what was seen when the nuke blast occurred. Three minute read.

"Google closing in on cheap renewable energy" --http://www.reuters.com/article/reutersINCOnlineReport/idUSTRE5592X120090610 Google may be taking on the coal industry - OMG. Very interesting - hopeful even.

TWO JAPANESE CITIZENS CARRYING $134 BILLION WORTH OF UNDECLARED, POSSIBLY COUNTERFEIT U.S. BONDS DETAINED IN ITALY

I ask you - how could this headline not be the headline of every paper? http://cryptogon.com/?p=9095 Could this be the ultimate `follow the money' story?

"The ten different types of pot dealers for the young/new tokers" -- http://forum.grasscity.com/apprentice-tokers/320639-ten-different-types-pot-dealers-young-new-tokers.html Some amazing insights in this fun article.

http://housing-kaboom.blogspot.com/2009/06/crashing-through-fair-market.html Is the housing market about to over-correct - or - is this the elevator down?

See you tomorrow.

How Marijuana's Natural Positioning Between Tobacco And Alcohol Hinders Legalization

Within the past week or so I posted about the four `marketing categories' of all people concerning cannabis http://realheavypolitics.blogspot.com/2009/06/cannabis-like-all-products-has-four.html, and, in that post, I noted how the vast majority of all people fall into the Trier-Rejector category, and, the Aware Non-Triers category. I also noted how the media `markets' `pot issues' to each of the categories - including users of marijuana (for users, they use the scare tactic such as `this is your brain on drugs').

So, now, turn your attention to the products of alcohol and tobacco - the `legal' recreational `drugs' that are marketed to society (with controls by the government for disclosure of danger on tobacco, and alcohol, and age and tax controls on both).

As you know, in recent years, the government has `come down' further on many areas on tobacco, and doesn't allow its use in closed public places in many states. Some have even suggested extending that prohibition on public usage to include ones personal car. All of these anti-smoking laws have been done in the past 15 years, seemingly out of nowhere, on upwards of 20-25% of the United States adult public who smoke tobacco (up to 1/3 of adults in some countries use tobacco, 1.1 BILLION adults worldwide) - by a few goodie twoshoes. And, nearly all of it done without a peep of protest.


Indeed, I don't remember even ONE protest march in favor of restricting adult usage of tobacco in places such as restaurants and bars - not one. EVER. This just goes to show how politicians can do the bidding of insurance companies and more.

(I'm reminded of the saying involving `them coming for you' -- and how society doesn't react until it's THEM who is being `come for'. In this instance, the tobacco smokers didn't react when the pot prohibition was passed decades ago and continued to ignore the pot smokers targeting by the governments.)

But, even as a known product that kills (the WHO says 4.5 million die worldwide each year from long term tobacco use) - commercial marketed tobacco has been able to starve off the final level of government control - that of making it illegal. (I say `commercial marketed tobacco' (CMT) because CMT is altered in many ways from `straight - unaltered' tobacco -- so, in many ways - we really don't know if TOBACCO is really extra dangerous or is it the additives that keep it burning.) It remains as the approved recreational `smoking product' - even if nicotine is addictive and creates a temporary minor buzz.


And, as you know, you can still find tobacco brands advertised in magazines. And, finally, tobacco has been a big supporter of lawyers in recent years attempting to fight back the multi-hundred billion dollar lawsuit it is living under. Indeed, these are the `terms':



Financial Provisions
States were to receive over $206 billion over 25 years:
Up-front payments - $12.742 billion.
Annual Payments, beginning April 15, 2000 - $183.177 billion through 2025.
Strategic Contribution Fund, 2008-2017 - $8.61 billion.
National Foundation ($250 million over 10 years).
Public Education Fund (at least $1.45 billion 2000-2003).
State Enforcement Fund ($50 million, one-time payment).
National Association of Attorneys General ($1.5 billion over next 10 years).

Then, on the other hand of legal recreational drug use in America, we have alcohol - a proven killer of innocent people on our nations highways due to misuse - and, a drug implicated in domestic violence and as having long term health effects. Additionally, as a HARD drug, many people die yearly from an extreme intoxication level of just one consumption setting. (I define hard drugs as drugs that can be used in one day to overdose to a death level. Obviously, with this standard, pot and tobacco, are NOT hard drugs.)

But, regardless of all of the known negatives listed above - alcohol remains legal in most places for adults over 21. Indeed, alcohol is even permitted to advertise on TV - with some restrictions - and of course on radio, print, and billboards. And, obviously, alcohol is legal for one main reason - people like to be able to alter their own consciousness - ie: to get high(er). People like to use things that alter their reactions and perceptions. And, of course, alcohol is legal because PROHIBITION didn't work. Oh, BTW, the alcohol industry is one of the biggest supporters of our political candidates and parties.

So, we have one heavily taxed product that is the allowed recreational smoke (tobacco - over 350 billion cigarettes smoked a year) - and one heavily taxed product the allowed recreational high (alcohol). Both of which are `heavily taxed' (indeed, up to 400+ communities have a local tax per pack on tobacco - up to 2.68 per pack in Chicago-Cook County) and both of which would be in competition with a product that could be grown for almost free in any home.

And, then, we have pot. A free natural medicinal plant used - never marketed - that does or satisfies what BOTH of the currently legal recreational drugs do. Compared to tobacco - it provides a flavored smoke that gives a small buzz (low THC would obviously be marketed.) And, compared to alcohol, - it provides `the high' desired by many drinkers. Indeed, the `high' is so controlled compared to the alcohol high - that many NON-users of illegal cannabis - may indeed prefer this method of seeking a recreational high - if it were legal. Consequently, you cannot tell me that both of these marketed products don't feel threatened. Let alone pain killers or sleep aids marketed round the clock on TV.

Indeed, I think the media inherently KNOWS - that it's media dollars are threatened by real legalization (as it is unlikely that legalization would include promoting via advertising)- likewise, both legal recreational drugs know it would affect their market too. And, everyday, we see the skew in the coverage of every pot issue by the media - to every human issue raised by the war on drugs. The position of the media and the politicians now and for the last 3 plus decades has been "we don't need another legal recreational drug."

In fact, the ultimate reason for the media and government NEVER covering pot usage as a personal `right' - may have to do with the fact that IF a third recreational drug was `legalized' like pot --- would someone `push' for a fourth recreational drug and so on. Also, with legalization, the government and media would have to admit to being `wrong' on one aspect of the war on drugs - which would open questions about being `wrong' about `other drugs -or the whole thing'. And, as we know, the prison industry is one of the few job growth areas in America - and fits in with the bloated government control politicians love.

The purpose of this post has been to highlight the obvious connection to how pot would affect legal recreational drugs, the taxes collected on them, and politicians and media who are compromised by their connection to the legal recreational drugs.

Links used for this post and more:

http://thewhitedsepulchre.blogspot.com/2009/06/guess-who-helped-write-new-tobacco-bill.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5819a2.htm Federal and State Cigarette Excise Taxes --- United States, 1995--2009

"It's true. Starting in July, Dutch folks will not be allowed to smoke cigarettes in bars, restaurants and cafes, including in the coffee shops famous for selling soft drugs. But, and this is a big "but," smoking marijuana or hashish will still be legal!" http://www.legaljuice.com/2008/06/pot_yes_tobacco_no_1.html

Tobacco, Liquor Firms Keep Party Donations Flowing - http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1P2-650096.html

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_americans_smoke_cigarettes

Is Idaho Ready for Medical Marijuana? - http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/06/10/is-idaho-ready-for-medical-marijuana/

Cannabis, Like All Products, Has Four `Marketing' Categories

Hello, welcome to Real Heavy Politics - thanks for visiting. As you know, on this blog I cover the insanity of the marijuana laws and policies. And, to make those laws and policies, our worthless politicians and spoonfed media - `market' their ideas about `the product' based on targeting specific `marketing' or `user' groups. So, for a quick review of your Marketing 101 class - here are those categories, and a few words about each.

The Four Marketing Categories Of Cannabis

#1 - `Current' Users - All products have levels of users that are considered `current users' - often defined by `how often' someone uses a `category'. Examples of this can vary from near 100% daily users of water or toilet paper - down to considering a person who uses cannabis once a year being a `current' user. If someone has NOT used something for a considerable amount of time - they generally are considered a `trier-rejector' - a category of marketing you will see defined below.

Concerning Cannabis - as you probably know - there is everything from multi-time daily users to the person who is only an occasional user with friends. These occasional users can be as little as once every couple years - even decades. But, as we all know too, the `marketing' to `users' - what is totally normal for legal products - doesn't really exist for cannabis - at all. Indeed, interestingly, about the only `marketing' to users are PSA's such as `this is your brain on drugs' - attempting to make usage seem dangerous. The funny part of that - of course - is that the users KNOW that it isn't. The commercials do little to discourage usage do to being off target to most users experience. Indeed, while the on the surface effort is to appeal to users to STOP - the real targets are the other three categories.

However, the day may come when cannabis will be marketed in a manner similar to beer and alcohol. THEN, we will see the `positives' about the product that are NEVER allowed to be even mentioned in our prohibition supported by the shameful media. What can be said when a marijuana leaf IMAGE is pixeled out on TV, as it is or was on MTV - or the `policy' that NBC had in place for years about NO positives being shown or mentioned associated with drug use. Indeed, these policies of prohibition are used to distort perceptions in the other three categories - the ones the media must keep `under wraps' if the politicians desire to use the drug issue as being `tough on crime' image is to persist.

So, lets look at the other marketing groups for cannabis:

#2 - `Aware Non-Triers' - Arguably, this may be the largest `market' grouping of cannabis - as it is likely that slightly more than 50% of the adult population has never broken the law by inhaling. It is this category the media is most interested in selling it's BS about marijuana as these folks don't have the experience to refute a word the media says. Therefore, almost nothing is or has been off-limits -- "pot smokers are lazy" - "pot smokers are dangerous drivers" - "pot causes lethargy" - "pot is a gateway drug" - etc. etc. etc. The list is endless.

The goal -- keep these sheeple following the standard "we need to lock them up" positioning - to keep the prison system running - to keep the lawyers happy - to keep the beer companies happy - ETC. Indeed, this is the most important marketing group to the big media because if THIS group ever starts to doubt the word of the government on this issue - all is lost for the old time powerbrokers.

#3 - `Trier-Rejectors' --- This grouping is ALMOST the size of the Aware Non-Trier group --- this group includes all the `old time users' of the 60's and 70's (and probably 80's and 90's too) who once used the product - but - in becoming an adult (and losing their connections) decided it would be best to follow the law - and not risk a `record' (the vast majority of previous users, of course, didn't get busted). It's this group who is directly targeted with the `the marijuana these days isn't your fathers (your) marijuana' - desperately hoping these folks NEVER use it again (even if they don't support the prohibition strongly).

#4 - `Non-Aware, Non-Users' ---- This is almost non-existent as a marketing group as nearly all adults in America are aware of marijuana in some manner.

Here's some more pot links:

http://www.ukcia.org/ A website dedicated to the issue of cannabis law reform

"the findings by a pharmacology team from the University of Adelaide and Transport SA showed drivers who had smoked marijuana were marginally less likely to have an accident than those who were drug-free." http://www.ukcia.org/research/driving4.html The pansy media doesn't talk much about this - do they?

And, as usual, I want to leave you with some diversion from the endless BS of the policy makers:

Real Heavy Politics - Saturday Links

These links bothered me this week - how about you?

“The big banks’ profits were totally bogus,” .....“The new accounting rules, the stress tests: They’re all part of a major effort to put lipstick on a pig.” http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=alC3LxSjomZ8

Feds Arrest the Liberty Dollar Competition - http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/027084.html Yes, the idiots think that putting someone in jail for having currency WITH VALUE - is a crime.

http://www.tissuepathology.typepad.com/files/prayson_anndiagpath_dec2008.pdf This one is called - Fast Food Burgers, What Are We Really Eating? Scary stuff - strange stuff. Is it really possible that ALL FF burgers are LESS than 20% meat?

As you know, I often try to leave you with some entertainment to offset the lunacy of the government - like this.

Will Big Media's Pot Smoker Image Ever Evolve From A Stupid, Out-Of-Control Twinkie Munchies Craving, Free-Love, Lazy, Longhair,Tie-Dye Stoner?

Hello, welcome back to Real Heavy Politics - today is our one month anniversary - and thanks for your support and clicks over the 30 days. If today is your first visit - this is a blog that often posts about the beyond stupid marijuana laws of our country. And, as you can see from the title of today's post - here we go again.

First, when I was growing up in the 50's - marijuana didn't exist. LOL. Well, of course it existed, but as a 7 year old in 1959, not really. But, something happened in 1959 to `the media', including TV and movies, - The Beatniks. And, since many of today's smokers may not really be familiar with the Beatniks and the beginning of the mainstream coverage of the `drug movement' in general - let me provide some quick background.

In looking deeper into the background - `The Beat Generation' is a phrase used to describe several American writers of the mid-50's who wrote about a lifestyle that included a general rejection of mainstream-straight values - but - embraced an experimentation with drugs (often for insights and creativity) and different sexuality than marriage only intercourse. The original non-conformists. These beat writers included Allen Ginsberg, William S. Burroughs, and Jack Kerouac.

And, by 1959, the TV show The Many Loves Of Dobie Gillis featured the `beatnik' Maynard G. Krebs who had a unkempt appearance, hated to work (lazy), and `talked slang-lingo'.

As Wikipedia.Org puts it - "Maynard G. Krebs became a well known figure in American popular culture, especially among members of the mainstream culture who had never had any contact with actual "beats", and formed the basis for the beatnik character archetype" (my italics)

Also, in 1959 - further definition to these `beatnik' characters was the movie `The Beat Generation' talking about those `way-out' beatniks. (See movie poster above.) And, as the 50's became the 60's - an image of `alternative life users' was being set. An image that in the mid-60's transferred from the somewhat innocent experimenting goateed Beatniks to the `guilty users ' - the long haired Hippies. `Hippies' that `used to be straight - before the Beatniks'. The US and THEM of the late 60's and all that came to represent. The turn-on, drop-out movement - to the straight media. Suddenly, a few Beatniks smoking and dropping acid for enlightenment - became millions of pot smoking, anti-war activists -who were EVEN rejecting marriage (and waiting for sex) in favor of `living together' and even `free love'.

Now, I'm hardly going to try to summarize the 60's in this article - so - let us continue onward towards the current media characterization of pot users. I also have to fess up that I have not seen the show `Weeds' on Cable. That said, I don't believe the characterizations I lay out are misrepresentative.

Today's Pot Smokers - A Media Handbook

Pot smokers are stupid. Look at the way they talk, like Cheech and Chong - `like, what's up maaaaaaaan' `got any reefer maaaaannnn'. Pot smokers are stupid and use slang-lingo. They talk slow and even walk slow; perhaps draggin one leg like Chester from Gunsmoke. Or walking like the `Keep Truckin' days of the 70's - Dead style. Yes, you can portray smokers as nearly having disabilities and it WILL be funny (with the laughtrack).

Pot smokers can't control themselves (which viewers find hilarious) - just look at how they get the munchies. Show them with uncontrollable urges for sweets or bad food such as pizza or tacos. Always show food mashed around the mouth for effect and the person nearly choking trying to get as much food in the mouth as possible. It's sometimes fun to show the smokers using a wrong utensil such as a knife to eat french fries. NEVER show them enjoying a delicacy or fine wine.

Pot smokers sexual habits AREN'T like Americas. Imply that pot smokers MORALS are not like Americas -- you know, they fornicate and don't get married, they have 3somes, they live in communes. Nothing is too over the top is making sure they are portrayed as something NOT like normal -- gay pot smokers, sure; bi-sexual, sure; swingers, sure; kinky, of course. Just make sure NEVER to portray pot smokers as married AND monogamous.

Pot smokers wear only Tie-Dye and only listen to rock or reggae or rap music. It's very important to note that you only show YOUNG people being associated with pot smoking - something mature adults would never do. Pot ceases to be of interest to anyone over 30 - so never show that. Never break the image that pot usage is a youthful, shameful endeavor that is regretted at a later age (over 30).

Pot smokers LOOK different - long hair helps build this image - make sure to emphasize that smokers never look like the straight John Q. Public. If long hair is out, how about a goatee or mohawk? And, since smokers are LAZY, that long hair can be somewhat snarled - indicating the hippie doesn't even comb his hair (this is especially good for portraying Rastafarian's).

Finally, to emphasize once again - smokers are LAZY - never show them as having a difficult or challenging job - or - anyone asking a stoner for any advice of any kind. After all, wouldn't they just tell you to `go ask Alice'?

So, to summarize, the offbeat character of the Beatnik, transformed into the Hippie and NEVER evolved with the media since the mid-70's and the beginning of the Drug war in the 80's. Regardless of the transformation of usage and user types. Indeed, our current spoonfed media - seems largely oblivious to any changes - happy to keep the beer advertisers happy, the prescription drug advertisers - and politicians - three of the biggest advertisers on any TV station - money of which they could NOT run a their business on without.

Indeed, how will they turn Maynard G. Krebs into John Q. Public if legalization ever happens is beyond me. Then again, if Mr. Public would be willing to wear a Tie-Dye, perhaps all is not lost yet.

Real Heavy Politics - Today's Links

http://realheavypolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/what-if-pot-is-performance-enhancing.html

http://realheavypolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/are-americas-freedoms-big-enough-to.html

Finally, an example of what this article is all about - media BS - http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/us_world/Marijuana-Will-Lift-Us-Out-Of-Recession.html

Have you bookmarked me - please come back tomorrow.

"Chinese financial assets are very safe," he said, drawing laughter from the audience.

The above quote is from this article talking about Mr. Geithner's trip to China http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8076642.stm - it must have been an amazing moment. Our bloated beyond belief government - begging - the society structure we have long abhorred (we claimed) - communism - for dollars.

More Real Heavy Politics - Links:

http://www.leafpot.com/index_futureNYtimesheadline.html Leafpot is the first to carry an article from this website.

Tennessee: Firearms Freedom Act Passes Both Houses http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/06/03/tennessee-firearms-freedom-act-passes-both-houses/

Did you know that I also have a blog called The Heavy Stuff? http://www.theheavystuff.com/

And, finally, why do you never hear about pilots still talking like this?

Is `State Sovereignty' A Codeword For Independence From D.C.?

Recently, I ran across this link http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/06/02/taking-another-stand-for-state-sovereignty/ written by an Oklahoma State Representative that is about a states right to govern their own affairs. The gentleman that wrote the article Jason Murphey (OK-31) certainly is a man who somewhat represents the few politicians who actually are NOT worthless. Here is a man who indeed is in touch with an element of the public that may present their anger with D.C. in an incredible way - essentially saying - thanks but - no thanks - for the Federal ties.


Now, that is not to say that Oklahoma will no longer support the military with soldiers; or set up a border guard - or anything that dramatic. But, what may become too clear to ignore very soon - is the increasing disparity of the states in this country - including the individual states `needs' from D.C. And, it will become increasingly clear that all states will be bailing out the few that `profited' (and now busted) from the `housing bubble'.


Indeed, we have all heard the stories - even before the real estate crash - of PLENTY of Californians literally LIVING off the `value increases' in their homestead - and, had the re-finances pulling out that `value' to prove it. It was the American dream - just save enough to buy a home and IT would pay you forever.


Unfortunately, forever, was a few years pipe dream. But, 10's of millions took advantage of the free spicket in California -- and to a degree in various other boom states such as Florida. And, indeed, because of all the `cash' being made - the bankers made lots of dough, as did builders, appraisers, insurance companies, and eventually wall-street, etc. And, it ALL WAS AT THE EXPENSE OF THE REST OF THE COUNTRY that played within or by the old rules of `investment'.


But, now, the bill is due. And some states, soon, will probably begin to balk at the idea of FOREVER depressing their local economy to support those few rouge states. Indeed, I'd expect more and more states to begin to take `money' into their own hands -rather than send it off - expecting of course, even `more' to return. Only, that MORE will be only to a few states - the cheater states.

Expect the disengagement to begin in a state like Texas or some oil rich state. Is it so hard to imagine a Texas pullout, followed by a Louisiana or Oklahoma? Right there is a pretty big chunk of land. Do you really think that Alaska or Hawaii are committed to financing the mainland? Is this idea really so outrageous?

Tell me what you think.

Here's a couple more links for diversion:

http://seasteading.org/ "What is "Seasteading"?
Seasteading is creating permanent dwellings on the ocean - homesteading the high seas. A seastead, like in the picture to the right, is a structure meant for permanent occupation on the ocean." The `just form your own country movement'. Wow.

Finally, - so you think we've really advanced far in the last 90 years - right? Well then, take a look at this!

Five Reasons We Won’t Be Legalizing Pot - A Rebuttal

Recently, the Santa Monica Mirror allowed someone named Steve Stajich the opportunity to write a piece for their newspaper - shortly after the California Governor did the outlandish thing of suggesting it was time for `a debate' about legal use of marijuana with the `state' collecting taxes on sales. Indeed, the author used the opportunity to offer 5 reasons why Pot will NOT be legalized in California.



To which - I offer a rebuttal.



His #1 reason:It’s Not Like State Gambling… or is It? .......information on gambling addiction and its destructive impacts is always neatly left out of ads ......legalized activity means the people’s representative government is socializing and endorsing the behavior involved. Evidently, this open-minded writer doesn't like gambling being offered legally because some people get a `gambling addiction'. Should we build tunnels under roads because some people get hit by cars when crossing the street? Should we have prohibition with alcohol for the same reason? Should we forbid folks to eat certain foods because they might make you fat and a burden to the state? Really, folks, the lamest of all reasons is to say that SOME adults can't handle it - this guy must be a real winner - probably walks his kids to school so they don't get abducted. And, BTW, having something being legal doesn't mean the state endorses mis-use.



His #2 reason:Teachers Will Love You.....Jeeze, Arnold… we’re having problems keeping diabetes-inflicting sugar and fat out of schools! Do you hang with school teachers at all? As I expected, an overprotecter in every way is the best description for a guy who probably thinks he is a democrap `protecting' the people. The `we don't do it for the kids' reason doesn't address the `lets throw adults in jail for their choices' counterpoint. Oh, BTW, this slimy writer NEVER mentions the failed decades long drug war, and it's drain on the system that COULD have spent that same state funds on Education -- must have not fit his agenda.



His #3 reason:Throwing the Baby in with the Bong Water....“Hello, Governor? Please explain how legalizing marijuana will reduce teen pregnancy. (PAUSE) Our lines our open. (PAUSE) Governor, please call with that answer. (PAUSE) Again that phone number…” Apparently the Spliff-inator has looked at the stats regarding teen sexual behavior and teen pregnancy and concluded, “What’s needed here is more access to marijuana.” I'm really speechless that some editor let this guy whine on and on about teens as his only point - that said - let me give the sadly delusioned writer a bit of hope. You see, idiot, if teens DRANK less alcohol - for whatever reason - the likelihood is that fewer teen girls will end up with a baby in the cooker.

His #4 reason: Now We Can Beat China! ....What’s holding back American manufacturing and productivity? That’s right: Our workers don’t have any state-endorsed pot to smoke during lunch breaks. How different the stories of GM and Chrysler if only we’d had the good sense to make it easier (and revenue producing!) for line workers to smoke a “fatty” with their morning coffee... So, let me get this right - don't make it available because `workers will use it on the job'. Let me clue-in our clueless writer - who probably thinks he doesn't even know someone who is a user ---- IT'S AVAILABLE TO ANYONE WHO WANTS IT. Only the clueless think that folks are WAITING to have availability - rates of smoking are not likely to change much as folks have been IGNORING the laws for DECADES. And, regardless of folks having access for decades, his concern for doobies on the assembly line have yet to happen. Talk about brainless.

His #5 reason: Other Experiments Didn’t Quite Work....Our nation’s experiments with legalizing the drugs tobacco and alcohol have been less than successful. Drunk driving deaths and alcohol-fueled violence, disease and death from tobacco; the state realizes revenues from these substances yet no one is arguing we should widen access (for more state funds) to either of those
First, IF pot were legalized, it would be a RE-legalization - and indeed - this `experiment' with prohibition, indeed, hasn't worked. Drug legalization isn't supposed to be `successful' - it's supposed to be - well - an adult approach to an on-going thing. With regulation and control, and yes, revenue. And, certainly, this lame writer isn't suggesting that he thinks legal pot would bring any where near the levels of distress that those other two legal drugs bring? IS HE? Could he be that clueless? Could the Santa Monica paper be that clueless?

Now - let me bring you FIVE REAL REASONS POT will not be legalized anytime soon. Obviously, this writer is so unaware that perhaps this will help.

1. Pot is HUGE business for the lawyers of this country.
2. The drug laws are huge business for the prison industry. Questioning even one law will make some want all to be freed from prison, not just the smokers.
3. Illegal pot supports government jobs from the county clerk, police force levels including parole officers, to helicopter pilots.
4. Beer manufacturers would have competition (that could be grown for free in the home).
5. Pharmacological companies would see the need and demand for specific drugs decline, such as pain relievers and sleep aids.

(Oh, and BTW, Lawyers, Beer Companies, and The Pharmacy Industry - are some of the very biggest supporters of our political parties.)

Here's the Santa Monica Mirror link: http://www.smmirror.com/MainPages/DisplayArticleDetails.asp?eid=10170


More links:

http://www.startribune.com/opinion/commentary/45872952.html?elr=KArksLckD8EQDUoaEyqyP4O:DW3ckUiD3aPc:_Yyc:aUUsZ This one is called Three Myths About Marijuana -- might be good reading for Mr. Stajich.

Scientists are high on idea that marijuana reduces memory impairment -- http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-11/osu-sah111408.php Being good for the brain would not fit into Mr. Stajich's worldview.

Indeed, to folks like Mr. Stajich - the whole world probably started to go to hell in a basket with the invention of this dance below: