Marijuana PROHIBITION - Finally Enters The Debate - And Search

As CSN&Y sang, "It's Been A Long Time Comin" - but, it may be possible that the tide is finally turning about marijuana. Once the choice of only hippies and hipsters - the federal policy towards the flowering plant is finding a new hurdle to climb. Indeed, no longer is the herb finding it's main support in the occasional 420 rally attended by youth screaming at the elders for legalization - nowadays - it's the `medicine' for potentially millions no longer on the college campus.

In fact, if you look at the google trend graph above http://www.google.com/trends?q=marijuana+legalization%2C+marijuana+prohibition&ctab=0&geo=us&geor=all&date=all&sort=0 you can see the the word `prohibition' attached to `marijuana' is actually a new phenomena. Amazingly.

And, in just the last few months, these articles, one a link to a comparison between the automaker GM and marijuana prohibition http://www.prweb.com/releases/2009/06/prweb2485694.htm and the other http://www.emailwire.com/release/24957-CSI-President-Dr-Robert-Melamede-Testified-Yesterday-at-Denver-Hearing-Which-Stopped-Attempt-to-Restrict-Patients-Access-to-Medical-Marijuana-Cannabis-Science-Plans-for-End-of-Marijuana-Prohibition.html - about public discourse about the citizens passing medical marijuana laws and that `restrictions' on those laws amount to limitations of the benefits to users - has re-set the debate.

Indeed, those who have long held out hope of a change in the laws to legalize the product for everyone - may finally be getting the boost they need as more and more people, who are NOT users of marijuana, or, who were once users of marijuana, are beginning to view the governments actions as a Prohibition - instead of legal actions.

Legalization only comes when it is acknowledged by the population that a prohibition exists.

And, as more and more states pass Medical Marijuana - those that are PROHIBITED in other states from having that medicine - are indeed, beginning to see the issue in a new way. Indeed, PROHIBITION has COSTS. Not benefits. And, finally, after all these years - the term `Prohibition' is finally entering the lexicon of the debate - and is now, finally, associated with pot.

Other links for today:

Jon Stewart slams media for missing ACORN story: 'Where the hell were you!?' - http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Jon-Stewart-slams-the-media-for-missing-ACORN-story-Where-the-hell-were-you-59469292.html Includes the video too.
http://norml.org/index.cfm?Group_ID=5450 Marijuana and Driving: A Review of the Scientific Evidence - Here's a resource alert for you hipsters.
http://www.popsci.com/node/38347/?cmpid=PSCenews091709 Scientists Find The Gene That Produces THC - Beautiful picture too.
California must go bankrupt - http://www.marketwatch.com/story/california-must-go-bankrupt-2009-09-18?siteid=yahoomy - Read the reasons WHY California needs to give the battle up. Bloated government - finally being called what it is.
http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle_blog/2009/sep/17/former_mexican_president_propose - Former Mexican President Proposes Legalizing Drugs in Mexico AND the U.S. - And, the worthless media again underplays the remarks.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/209830 Losing Afghanistan’s Drug War - UN Drug czar says.

A Rebuttal To Kevin Sabet About Marijuana Policy

Almost exactly a month ago - someone named Kevin Sabet - formally a drone at the Office of National Drug Control Policy under Bush and Clinton - wrote a piece that appeared in Hempnewstv.wordpress.com titled "The price of legalizing pot would be too high" - to which I offer a rebuttal point for point.

Kevin begins with talking about how Schwarzenegger called for a discussion about Pot Legalization (due to budget problems) and that the governor was responding to "new public opinion polls showing greater interest in the policy idea" and then goes on to say "and with the mounting problems associated with the drug trade in Mexico and here in the U.S., it is hard to blame anyone for suggesting that we at least consider all potential policy solutions."

Well, at least Kevin got one point right - the governor was indeed floating a trial balloon -- but NOT because of peoples interest being due to "the mounting problems associated with the drug trade" --- NO, Kevin - policy maven - he was responding to the WASTE of money not being collected in taxes - a typical politician view suddenly given `cover' by the national and state polls about taxing and legalizing the drug. Sorry you missed that point Kevin.

Then, Kevin, the drone from the National Drug Control Office says "Unfortunately, however, the financial costs of marijuana legalization would never outweigh its benefits". So, let's take a look at ALL of the impressive (not) things that the Knowledgeable Kevin has to enlighten us with. The first point Kevin the policy wonk wants to make is "What is rarely discussed, however, is that the likely increase in marijuana prevalence resulting from legalization would probably increase the already high costs of marijuana use in society. Accidents would increase, health-care costs would rise and productivity would suffer."

I'll wait a moment while all those smarter than this policy wonk absorb the stupidity of the words "the already high costs of marijuana use". Let's see, `accidents would increase' ----- alas, Kevin, the policy wonk, must not be aware that `stoned drivers' are NOT `drunk drivers' and indeed in tests have been shown to be even more cautious than `straight' drivers. So, point one - totally unfounded.

And, so therefore,`health care costs' --- would NOT rise ---- despite Kevin's ideas from being surrounded by straights for years in the Drug Control office. So, point two - totally unfounded. Next, `productivity would suffer' -- you'll notice, in the link that Kevin offers NO proof or even reasoning on this point http://hempnewstv.wordpress.com/2009/06/16/the-price-of-legalizing-pot-would-be-too-high/ -- So, point three --- show me the data Kevin - I don't believe you.

Next, Kevin does what any good policy wonk for the government does -- looks at the usage of the legal HARD drug of alcohol - noting how the taxes collected do not in any way reflect the harm the product does to society or the cost it brings to society. The wonks call this the `diversion facts' - he does the same for the costs that tobacco bring to society - in comparison to the taxes that tobacco brings in and with a flair says " our two already legal drugs — alcohol and tobacco — offer chilling illustrations of how an open market fuels greater harms"

Are you sick to your stomach yet? Can you believe that the word `right for an adult to choose' hasn't been mentioned? Believe me, it gets worse - as it only can when listening to a policy wonk advocate. So, he continues "Commercialization glamorizes their use and furthers their social acceptance. High profits make aggressive marketing worthwhile for sellers. Addiction is simply the price of doing business."

Yeah, I thought that line would bring up your vomit.

First, or rather, fourth -- Commercialization is VERY unlikely to be the case if pot is legalized --- as I believe that all `marketing' would be illegal -- we are VERY unlikely to see BC bud ads - simply being available is all the advertising that would be needed. Too bad that Kevin doesn't understand that -- so, point four - unfounded. Next up -- Kevin's point that being legal would further the social acceptance --- well, Kevin, you are right --- SO WHAT?

Then we are hit with what I assume the wonk thinks is his best point -- `addiction is the price' ----------- I mean, what can one expect out of a policy wonk within the Drug Control Office ----------- Kevin -- I suggest you look up the word and find some PROOF that pot is addictive like tobacco (nicotine) OR alcohol. Even writing the words Kevin makes your whole article stupid on the face of it -- if your worry is `ADDICTION'. It would be laughable if it wasn't probably true that you and your cronies believe it. Nevertheless, point five - laughable.

You would think, that by now, Kevin has trotted out all of his lousy stupid points, right? Hardly, he goes on next with: "Would marijuana use rise in a legal market for the drug? Admittedly, marijuana is not very difficult to obtain currently, but a legal market would make getting the drug that much easier. Tobacco and alcohol are used regularly by 30 percent and 65 percent of the population, respectively, while all illegal drugs combined are used by about 6 percent of Americans." All I can say to this is -- Kevin, get your `facts' straight -- tobacco is currently used by 21-24% --- alcohol by about 50% (in the last year) and illegal drugs -- mainly pot -- by about 10%.... One should certainly hope that folks in charge of dispensing hard facts would have them a little better than this slop. But, Kevin doesn't -- obviously -- then again, why would someone in the Drug Control office care about things like Facts.

Next, Kevin has the audacity to use these words: "An honest debate on marijuana policy also carefully considers the costs of our current approach. Arrest rates for marijuana are relatively high, reaching about 800,000 last year. " Kevin, 800,000 is `relatively high'? You have got to be shitting me? Are you F-ing serious? He then goes on to say that serving jail time is relatively rare for pot -- tell that to the 20,000 held in pre-trial detention based on the last estimate. Do you think, Kevin, that 20,000 in jail for POT EVERYDAY is `relatively rare'? And, Kevin, would the 800K need lawyers? And, Kevin, would the 800K pay fines? Oh, and Kevin, you are aware that lawyers love having that business right - of course you are -- and of course you know that lawyers are one of the biggest supporters of BOTH political parties.

You would think that enough shit had come out of his mouth by now - but no - he continues "Finally, legalizing marijuana would in no way ensure that the most vicious drug-related problems — violence, economic-related crime, street gang activity — would disappear." One doesn't find someone this stupid very often, right readers? Yeah, Kevin you are right - Pot is NOT related to violence, economic related crime or street gang activity ---- SO F'ing what?

So, after all these shitty non-valid points -- Kevin brings home his ideas with "Moving beyond the simplistic and unrealistic option of legalization, what can we do to reduce marijuana use and the costly harms it brings?" Kevin, wake up, it's the LAWS that are the costly harm! And then finishes with "an open market for the stuff? That doesn’t pass the giggle test.'

NO, Kevin - it's your logic and facts that don't pass the giggle test.


More links to get under your skin:
During my 18 years of police service I was sent to zero calls because of the use of marijuana and about 1300 caused by alcohol. http://www.mccookgazette.com/story/1554485.html Maybe Kevin needs to read this.

Subway Will Use Phelps in Ads Despite Bong Photo http://industry.bnet.com/advertising/10002843/subway-will-use-phelps-in-ads-despite-bong-photo/

Law enforcement group launches drug legalization campaign http://westernstandard.ca/website/article.php?id=3001 The politicians are going to be very lonely when the cops stop enforcing their stupidity.

Australia town bans bottled water - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/8141569.stm

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

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.

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:

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.

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:

Friends Don't Let Friends Vote Democrap Or Republinut

Hello, welcome back to Real Heavy Politics @ Blogspot - I've really appreciated your support during this blogs first month of existence. And, as you can see from the posts I've made this month -- I'm not a big fan of our politicians or the way the political system seems to largely work. Indeed, as you can see from my sparse profile also on the sidebar -- I'm very very proud to say that I've NEVER thrown away my vote for President on one of the two major parties since 1972 - and - yes - I voted for Ron Paul a generation ago when he ran as a Libertarian.

One of the things you quickly discover when you decide NEVER to throw your vote away again on a Democrap or Republinut is that you NEVER hear YOUR voice on TV. You NEVER hear a REJECTeR of BOTH parties. You NEVER (seemingly) hear the Libertarian view stated by a Libertarian spokesperson. And, of course, you NEVER hear the outright haters of the political parties.

Yes, I said it - outright haters of the political parties. The HUGE % of folks that don't even bother to register to vote. THOSE folks who feel more identification with `rejecting the system' than `playing the game' at all. THOSE people who view the symbols of each party as stupid. After all, who is inspired by a bloated elephant or a jackass? How can neither party have had the courage to claim the Eagle or something more majestic than a Jackass? Indeed, do the Democraps actually think ANYONE would give two bird droppings if they dropped the Jackass?

But, then again, perhaps those are the PERFECT two symbols for our entrenched political parties (isn't it interesting that these same lawmakers could pass legislation making political ads free - thereby - taking the money out of the mouthpiece media that serves it). Perfect symbols indeed - bloated and stubborn. Protecting power - buying influence. Each party using subsets of America to kowtow too. Or, generate fear of.

Makes you feel slimy that you voted for this - doesn't it?

Boy, am I glad I've NEVER voted for THAT at the top of this countries ticket in over 3 decades. And, you too can free yourself. You too, can see that each party is only marginally different than the other.

And, when you do finally free your mind from thinking you identify as favoring one party over the other - you will take the below links in a different way. You will see them for what they are - the failing of worthless politicians protecting their own powerbase - and rigging the voting lines to do so. (How can anyone say they love this crappola?)

So, please - if YOU have the awakening - the discovery - the MOMENT - where you know that YOU will never vote for a democrap or repubinut for President - EVER again - then - make sure to follow the new chant for the 2000's - FRIENDS DON'T LET FRIENDS VOTE FOR PARTIES REPRESENTED BY A BLOATED ELEPHANT OR A STUBBORN JACKASS.


Sunday's Heavy Politics Links:

The latest increase raises federal obligations to a record $546,668 per household in 2008 -http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-05-28-debt_N.htm I ask, what kind of system that had REAL checks and balances (like a real third party) would permit this to happen? Only the media acting like a mouthpiece for the political parties and ignoring the people, I mean, sheeple, could have this happen.

County Pays Medical Marijuana User $2,000 for New Lamps Following Acquittal http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2009/may/29/county-pays-medical-marijuana-user-2000-for-new/ The sheriff's office would not return the marijuana it confiscated, however, because, Wilson said, "we don't know how much he may already have."
State law limits medical marijuana users to a 60-day supply What gets me is that the media in states that still arrest folks for pot seldom report these type of stories - indeed, they are almost underground news.

Marijuana Rivals Mainstream Drugs For Alleviating HIV/AIDS Symptoms -http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/05/090529081627.htm

Canada's 'Prince of Pot' Vows to Defeat U.S. War on Drugs - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,522918,00.html

Software Problems with a Breath Alcohol Detector http://www.schneier.com/blog/archives/2009/05/software_proble.html Readings are Not Averaged Correctly....which would cause the first reading to have more weight than successive readings Perfect example of cooking the books.

LAPD is Resisting Calif. Medical Marijuana Laws http://www.opposingviews.com/articles/opinion-lapd-is-resisting-calif-medical-marijuana-laws-r-1243568486 Politicians push hard on the police -after all - they control the police budget not the sheeple.

And, finally, note the weird viewpoint shown by CNN in this video - hope to see you tomorrow.

What IF Pot IS Performance Enhancing?

Decades Ago, there was a High Times magazine cover that had a question posed to a baseball star - the question was something like - If Bowie Kuhn had 100 dollars for every ball player that smoked pot what would he be - the answer - a rich man.

I start today's essay off with that little ancedote about the natural plant many in the country use daily as medication - or - for even the forbidden side of usage `recreation'. But, the real super secret side of usage - is the `esoteric' side of pot. The seeming `enhancement' of food. The seeming `enhancement' of music. Indeed, the seeming `enhancement' of enjoyment itself. It's really quite a remarkable, below the surface in mentions, `benefit' - one that few if any legal drugs offer - an enhancement to consciousness.

Indeed, one of the often mentioned `qualitative' benefits for smokers - is a clarity of mind. A oneness focus.

Isn't that `oneness focus' - something that athletes use for success; a side benefit of usage? Especially for athletes at the very top of their sport?

Wouldn't it be ironic if one day a sophisticated system really did ban usage due to it's potential mind benefits - the unfair advantage it gives for concentration? In a fortean world like ours - don't be surprised.

More links below:

http://www.bwcitypaper.com/Articles-i-2009-05-28-229395.113121_Obama_Loses_His_Cool.html Covers the obvious - that republicans and democrats different only by symbol - jackass or bloated elephant.

http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/05/27/tennessee-house-affirms-sovereignty/ I'm predicting the day will come when parts of the country refuse to pay for states with a huge drain of dollars going into them.

Are Wall Street speculators driving up gasoline prices? http://www.miamiherald.com/business/nation/story/1057972.html Will this be another example where the only way to make money is in commodities?

http://www.smartmoney.com/investing/economy/acclaimed-economist-says-the-recession-is-over/ Interesting graph, one problem - in the other recessions - wealth destruction wasn't a real issue - only now and the depression have that.

Finally, a little humor and tease to end your stay - I'd love to hear your comments.

Google Trends Indicate Political Viability For Medical Marijuana VS Legalized Pot

Gateway Drug vs Legalize Pot (top graph)

Medical Marijuana vs Legalize Pot (bottom graph)

Hello, welcome back to Real Heavy Politics - the blog. And, one of the very heaviest of all political issues is the decades long war on marijuana smokers carried out by both political parties. But, as you also know, the people in a few instances have risen out of the rhetoric to pass by vote more lenient measures about the natural plant - including - the bringing in a note from the doctor - for medical marijuana. And, even more recently, the outcome of the financial meltdown - cheerlead by our mindless media and worthless politicians - has prompted a few people to suggest legalizing pot for the tax revenue.

Indeed, smokers, craving only the basic right to self-medicate, can easily be swayed into thinking the politicians are going to do something about pot - even if the politicians really don't want to. --------- But, is that really the case?

CLICK GRAPH FOR FULL GRAPHIC INCLUDING TODAY'S FIGURES

Because, if you look at the above chart on Google - you can see that `medical marijuana' is a searched term 60 TIMES more often than `legalize pot'. And, you can see that as far as media volume for the terms - legalize pot doesn't even make a real blip.

And, finally, notice that legalize pot doesn't even beat gateway drug - and, as of today - gateway drug is going up and legalize pot going down.

Here's the direct link to those graphs too: http://www.google.com/trends?q=legalize+pot%2C+gateway+drug&ctab=0&geo=all&date=ytd&sort=0

http://www.google.com/trends?q=legalize+pot%2C+medical+marijuana&ctab=0&geo=all&date=ytd&sort=0

More links for today.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124329282377252471.html Maryland raised a special tax for those making a million - guess what happened?

FCC’s Warrantless Household Searches Alarm Experts - http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/05/fcc-raid/ Bloated governments think they have unlimited power.

Are America's Freedoms Big Enough To - Free The Marijuana Prisoners?

Men and women have fought for and died in attempts to support the freedom of the American people. To many in our society, that freedom, was felt to be `individual' freedom - even beyond the many `group freedoms' that have been won via hard fought political struggles (including the right to vote for black males and eventually women only 90 years ago). Indeed, our society is one history of great changes.

But, as we all know all too well - it's been mucked up. In fact, mucked up pretty bad - especially recently, and especially, by those `in power'. And, that in itself is nothing new either - but - before - the muck wasn't leveraged. And, the system is still mired in deep doo with little prospects of any immediate return to the lost `wealth' - that it had built up in the bubble of housing and banking. And, as usual, the powerbrokers will skate with less real harm to lifestyle than the sheeple they `lead'.

But, every once in a great while - a concurrence of events - leads to an unexpected outcome - and I wonder - could our society have reached a conclusion that could lead to the Freedom of the marijuana prisoners? Could a society, tired enough of the big media and politician power structure (the political ads are the bread and butter of the TV industry) - actually demand a fundamental change to `the system'? That somehow would overcome their filters on real information?

Because, make no bones about it. The police support for the political doctrine, played over and over by the media, that YOU do NOT have the right as an adult to self-medicate YOUR body - is BIG BUSINESS. You can imagine the business marijuana arrests brings to lawyers as one beginning point. And, of course, if an adult isn't allowed to use a `simple' plant to self medicate - that supports the entire prison industry by long terms for `hard' drug users. And, both support the court and prison industry.

If suddenly, self medication, and pot was a `right'; if suddenly, 40% of the above big business was gone (and perhaps much more if other drugs were looked at individually) - would the politicians do THAT during an economic downturn? To turn their back on Lawyers (one of the biggest supporters of the politicians)?

Yes, this is not a cake walk. This is NOT going to be easy. AND, legalization, will NEVER be a first step and is a RUSE. The first step folks, is going to be one thing.

AS A SOCIETY TO SAY --- NO MORE JAIL FOR POT `criminals' . Period.

And, not only that - NO public money to incarcerate for any reason on issues related to pot. Therefore, - no pre-trial detention - and all those currently serving time for pot related `crime' only - to be immediately released with sentence served in full. (Like no pictures allowed of certain things - would the media be allowed to broadcast the marijuana prisoners walking out of prison?)

This will not be easy for the politicians to swallow. And, while the media would never play it up - every politician would have egg on their face. In addition to every Judge and every policeman.

Some of those being released from prison, for pot, regardless of charge, will sue the system too. That should be expected. Or, is it really THIS that the politicians fear?

Because, if the medical marijuana laws say anything about our society - it's that a significant % of folks view their own body as sacred. As belonging to them. As having the right to self-medicate, even if that means overturning one of the biggest businesses in America - arresting pot smokers.

Once all the `smokers' are freed out of prisons. Once a smoker NEVER sees the inside of the county jail for pre-trial detention. Then, America will be showing the desire for the Big Freedoms the media wishes to suppress. Rather that shucking an Olympic champion like Kellogg's did - with full media play-up.

Indeed, how can REAL talk about legalization begin when ANYONE sits in jail? Shouldn't the real shout out be on this day to shout your freedom be:

FREE THE MARIJUANA PRISONERS

More Freedom links:

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/may212009/wall_street_questions_pl_5-21-09.php The Salem-News says that politicians `demonize' cannabis.

http://www.barcelonareporter.com/index.php?/news/comments/marijuana_chemical_may_fight_brain_cancer/

Yes, another article that supports the notion that pot may suppress cancer. Must be a side effect of good karma.

http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/pot/blunderof37.html How pot became illegal - a history.

Milk and Marijuana - gateway drugs -- Our FBI position. http://www.boingboing.net/2009/05/22/milk-the-gateway-dru.html

http://www.salem-news.com/articles/may192009/osp_operation_5-19-09.php Seems the Salem-News has at least a balance.

And, finally, someone gave grant money for this - the answer to blunts or joints - http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19443132?ordinalpos=3&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum

Future NY Times Headline - National Marijuana Tax Revenue Far Short Of Expectations

As we head into the holiday weekend - lets take a moment to relax our minds - and travel into the future to Dec. 2014; two years after a re-elected President Obama legalized marijuana. Indeed, to refresh your memory - in early December 2012, with the increased diversion of the `end of the world on Dec. 21st crowds' dominating the news - the President decided that he would `free every marijuana prisoner' in the nation and legalize and nationally tax the herb.

As you remember, by 2012, largely because of the Great Recession (as the downturn from the bank crisis of 2008 came to be called) 6 states had already legalized the plant and started to depend on the generated revenues and even on some increase in tourist trade (increases to the conventions in states with legal pot took off in comparison to `strict' states -as they - the non legal states - became to be known as). Indeed, the states that adopted the progressive `smoking bar' rules (letting over 21 age smoker establishments exist - like alcohol bars) - as opposed to the states which only allowed legal consumption in the home - did especially well in the revenue department. The `bar' states were also states that allowed advertising on billboards and most sold the herb in local shops and shut down the medical marijuana facilities. In these local shops, the product was sold at the price the market would bear and taxed at a higher rate than other goods and services - about 40%.

But, all states were not the same. By 2012, in 23 states, one could get a prescription for pot via ones personal doctor - but - still 28 states (The District Of Columbia became a state in 2011) were routinely arresting those in possession of pot. Interestingly, all of these arrest states had especially strong bar associations that had ties with local politicians.

But, the farce of readily available pot in one state and arrest in another - often - of course - within miles due to state lines - was becoming a little too much for even the worthless media and politicians to stand up in support of anymore. America was beginning to look like a place with no standard or morals when it came to justice -or marijuana policy. And, eventually, as you know, when the 4th budget with a trillion dollar deficit was announced - there was an outroar of protest to start ending the prosecution of all drug users - of `housing' millions at taxpayers expense.

The politicians in Washington knew they had to act and knew they had to compromise - so they passed on Dec. 4th 2012 - the National Marijuana Act (NMA). The NMA immediately declared marijuana a legal plant - and immediately set up a national chain of state run marijuana sellers stores - who would sell cannabis grown by the major tobacco companies (by this time the alcohol companies had bought the remaining tobacco firms) - in nearly every town with a population over 10,000.

The politicians were also pleased that as part of the negotiations over the NMA, they were able to still keep the prisons full (only a small % of those with longer sentences were pot users/sellers) and the lawyers busy with no change to the cocaine laws or sentences. Indeed, the prison industry said nary a word.

But, the best news - as it was sold to the non-marijuana smoking public - was that the price would be set at 50 dollars to 100 dollars an ounce and 85% was a TAX collected and split between the state and the national government (The stores were to run on the 15% of revenue as the rents were free - all were commercial properties that had been acquired by the banks the government owned since the Great Recession.) The other provision, of course, was the release of EVERY pot prisoner - no matter the charge - as long as the sentence was based solely on pot. Indeed, the joy of the 10's of thousands that December day two years ago was truly a proud moment in America. Real justice and just in time for Christmas. Indeed, the whole `legal pot thing' would quickly be swallowed up in the typical brainless media holiday spin. It was also expected that the new `low' price would keep home growing to a minimum. (Homeowners with children under 21 could only grow in a locked room was part of the NMA too.)

And, for a few months of 2013 - the added revenues were fairly significant. But, the politicians didn't figure on one thing - when they made possession of plants legal, totally legal, - a significant % of smokers started to grow their own needs - and found that it was very easy to do as most smokers needed less than a pound for a whole year - - even those that wanted more had no problem meeting their needs -as there was no limit on growing. (Outside growing on your own property was legal too.) And, by fall 2013 - with the first homegrown domestic crop - the sales in the stores began to dry up - as did the `revenue' the government wanted to make off the smokers backs. The same smokers they had ravaged the rights of for decades.

Because, those with lots of pot would give it to friends now - not even charge for it.

Oh, I forgot to say - when the NMA was passed - to satisfy the democrats concerns for `our children' and in deference to the republicans `religious right' - the law shut down all the smoker bars nationwide. Pot would NOT become an entertainment industry - this was not the first step down the slippery slope, the politicians promised - we would NOT be putting more druggies onto our nations roads. It would also guarantee the government as the sole legal source - I forgot to say that private selling was still illegal punishable with fine and `probation' (probation meant a monthly fee and contact with authorities for up to five years). Yes, the politics of the whole affair was complicated, but, done as only politicians can - wrongly.

Regardless, the free market price - rapidly returned to `the good old days' of the 70's -- regular smoke 15 an ounce, excellent smoke 35 an ounce. And, grown by a person one knew. And still sold in the friend network that worked so well for decades.

So, what was evident a year ago - winter 2013 - is now much worse. Virtually none of the oldtime smokers wanted to deal with the government in any way - even in a shop with killer 100 dollar an ounce pot. Indeed, almost 90% were now home growers and totally out of the market and tax scheme fostered by those who didn't know how smokers would react. Who didn't understand the remaining latent anger felt by them.

Indeed, about the only industries that directly benefited were the companies that made light systems and growing systems - because within a years time - the National Sales Stores were beginning to close. And, the anti-smoking forces had come out in force to discourage new pot smokers - who quickly dried up too. It seemed as if the laws really didn't discourage many from lighting up after all - despite decades of oppression and beyond stupid laws. If one wanted to smoke in 2011 before national legalization - one did.

And, then, I vaguely remembered an article I read on the internet. It had to be at least five years ago - perhaps in 2009. I swear, it had the same headline as I read here today December 14th 2014 - "National Marijuana Tax Revenue Far Short Of Expectations".

And, I chuckled to myself.

The Unspoken Connection Between Marijuana And Assisted Suicide

Hello, and welcome to Real Heavy Politics at Blogspot - thanks for hitting the link today or for already being a `regular' (according to data on the first 1,000 or so visitors to my 12 day old blog - about 32% of you are already repeat visitors). As you can see from the title of today's post -- this is about the REAL heavy stuff - the right to YOU controlling YOUR own body. The very idea and concept of who `owns' your body.

Now, before you veer off on a tangent about`right to life' and `abortion rights' and women `controlling their own body' - perhaps the only place you've heard that expression before - let me say that IMO - the two issues of `controlling ones body' are NOT equal. Meaning, the right to medicating one's own body and pregnancy `rights'.

However, that is NOT to say that I don't support the woman's choice in the matter of controlling her body - until a viable fetus is present in the later stages of pregnancy - I do support that right; but, likewise with pre-natal `rights' - at `some point' in a pregnancy, to me, the fetus indeed `has a body' that has innate `rights' in a sense (such as to be born).

Indeed, this idea I present - that YOU control the right to determine what happens to your body, and what you ingest - in the most fundamental sense - applies to such diverse ideas as marijuana consumption and doctor assisted suicide. In the case of adults consuming pot, a non-toxic product, the idea that the government has ANY role in telling adults what to do is nothing but big media propaganda.

And, it's big media propaganda because NO ONE ever - in the big media - takes on the right of an adult to determine what is best for them. To make an informed adult choice. That adults, have the RIGHT to use pot, a soft drug with no potential for overdose, compared to the hugely marketed, legal, hard drug of alcohol. Indeed, the RIGHT to THINK. (Obviously, the media does not push for individual rights only group rights - on occasion.)

And, the same concept and issue applies to doctor assisted suicide. Think of it; near the end of your life, if you are critically ill - and have chosen, in advance, the desire for such a decision to be made by you, your family and your doctor - what RIGHT does the government have at all - to say no? How can THAT, your life, your health, your BODY, be a decision of the GOVERNMENT?

Don't YOU, as a human, have the right to request a mixture of death producing drugs to end your suffering? Does the government have the RIGHT to force you to suffer? Does the government have the RIGHT to force you to be in pain? To spend on healthcare what you saved your life to pass onto your heirs and not to give to the insurance companies? This is waterboarding times 1 million.

The obvious answer is NO - except to those hopelessly hung up sheeple who are into the big media horse manure jargon and doublespeak of our worthless, often religion bent, politicians. Generally, what I call - Republinuts. Don't smile Democraps, both parties spew venom and pander shamelessly to segments of our population. And, ALL politicians avoid the difficult.

So, leave it to the blogging world to find articles like this. To expose ideas like this. Articles that SHOULD be part of the big media spin on issues in a free society without strong unspoken censorship - of life's most basic issues. Like the right to think; like the right to owning your own body - like your right to life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness and the right to death too.

So, finally, the unspoken connection -- the right to self medicate.


Here's some other links for you to consider today:

Supreme Court Hands Medical Marijuana Major Victory

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/05/18/supreme-court-hands-medic_n_204681.html

This is pretty much breaking news - the US Supreme Court is forcing a California city to follow the state law.

The Media Doesn't Get That Hyping Potent Pot Makes More People Want to Smoke It

http://www.alternet.org/drugreporter/140058/the_media_doesn%27t_get_that_hyping_potent_pot_makes_more_people_want_to_smoke_it/ Can't say this is really true - but is interesting.

Never-Ending Government Lies About Markets

http://mises.org/story/3446 Several minute politics read.

Marijuana Advocates FINALLY Urge Colleges To Mellow Out

http://realheavypolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/marijuana-advocates-finally-urge.html

See you tomorrow I hope.

Marijuana Advocates FINALLY Urge Colleges To Mellow Out

I have a new name for you to recognize - Mason Tvert - you see, he's the head of a Denver organization taking on the `pot is safer than alcohol' issue with colleges. And, because of that, he has been urging colleges to view pot violations as no worse than underage drinking violations. Indeed, plenty of facts are brandished about in this article worth considering - as are - the jaded `answers' of some of the colleges when confronted with students who say pot is safer than alcohol.

Which, of course, is the truth.

For example, check out these dumb words by the president emeritus of Vermont's Middlebury College, the person pushing the government to re-consider lowering the age needed to access the hard drug of alcohol to 18 instead of 21:

"The fact is marijuana is prohibited across the board. It's not a matter of age discrimination, as where alcohol is concerned," he said.

Age discrimination? WTF? Is this guy NUTS? Does he NOT understand the difference between Hard Drugs (ones that in a single setting can cause an overdose to the death level) and Soft drugs (one that do NOT kill via overdose)? Indeed, check out this data from the same article:

According to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism, about 1,700 college students ages 18 to 24 die each year from alcohol-related injuries, and 599,000 more are injured. The institute also estimates there are more than 696,000 alcohol-related assaults each year -- two-thirds of them by students under 21.

Or, how about this beyond stupid statement by another person tangentially involved in the pot-alcohol debate:

"We just don't have a lot of highly successful students who are potheads," Workman said.

Can you believe that ANYONE believes that crappola? Talk about needing an education! Here's the link a three minute read. If you are a college student, make sure that your buddies see this.

http://www.salon.com/wires/ap/us/2009/05/16/D987EUMG0_us_pot_penalties_campuses/index.html

Here's some more examples of bloated government:

http://freep.com/uploads/images/2008/07/saggychart0709.jpg How you dress in Michigan could result in a year in jail.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090515.wescalator16/BNStory/National/?page=rss&id=RTGAM.20090515.wescalator16 Woman cuffed for NOT holding handrail on an escalator.

See you tomorrow.

Doctor Prescriptions In The Last Prohibition And Current Prohibition

What you see above is a prescription written for Whiskey written during the last Prohibition - indeed - at the bottom of the prescription you can see the words `National Prohibition Act' --- yes, those were in the good old days when the government at least told a smidgen of truth - calling a prohibition for what it was.

So, you say that you didn't know that prescriptions were written for whiskey and other alcohols? I wonder why --- it wouldn't be because the big media hasn't mentioned it - would it? That big media that is always watching out for us? LOL.

Below you will find links that speak about the current prohibition and the alcohol prohibition baby boomers grandparents talked about. OverZealous Government One - OverZealous Government Two.

http://www.epmonthly.com/whitecoat/2008/02/whiskey-prescriptions-and-the-prohibition-act/comment-page-1/ This is the link to the above old-time prescription picture and lots of great information about that prohibition. This link is to an Emergency Physicians publication - make sure to read the comments.

http://prohibition.osu.edu/content/medicinal_alcohol.cfm One more background link on Medicinal Alcohol.

http://www.canorml.org/prop/MDRecForm.jpg The direct link to the top picture - much more readable here.

Other Marijuana Newslinks

Even I cast a leery eye to this one - until I read the four minute explanation.

http://www.doublex.com/section/health-science/why-i-give-my-9-year-old-pot

The return of Gatewood Galbraith in Kentucky - nothing like being 20 years ahead of the times. Here he delivers a note to the Governor of KY. office.

http://k4mm.org/?K4MM_News

Does Pot Inhibit Seizures - of the body? This graphic says YES. More bad news for those who ruse about pots negative effects. Just wait till the media is forced to talk about the facts that marijuana seems to inhibit CANCER.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/22390244@N07/2159512338/

Finally, a link about CNN and where they get their money:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2005/10/19/222230/01

This blog is now 10 days old - and had over 300 visitors yesterday - thanks for your support - bookmark and help spread the word. Thanks.

The Great Marijuana Potency Ruse

From the dictionary the definition of `ruse' - a wily subterfuge - `ruser' - to dodge, deceive.

I present the exact definition from the dictionary above because the word has fallen out of favor and is so so seldom used by our big media -- I assume because almost all they do is `ruse'. And, as you can see from the title of this post - their latest ruse is a finding about some hand selected, specially grown, top notch marijuana flowers - that `scientists' find has the highest THC content yet.

So, CNN then takes this `fact' and turns it into the famous big media ruse (one of dozens about pot) that `this is not your fathers (your era) marijuana' - NO - `this pot is more dangerous than yesteryear'. Remember, CNN has NO interest in marijuana being legalized as it would affect most of their advertisers in one form or another -- be it the drug manufacturers always pushing their pills on CNN, or the beer advertisers, or the cotton industry, or the endless lawyers who advertise on CNN.

Again, CNN has NO interest in portraying pot in a positive light.

So, they push this new government/big media/big business spin, or ruse, that is so necessary and needed to keep pot and its smokers in its proper place. Regardless if it is meaningless to smokers or users. Perhaps the most hilarious part is that they never compare marijuana `strength' `levels' (of THC) - to the `counterpart' in the area of alcohol. Ignoring that anyone can buy `weak' levels of alcohol like beer (the most popular alcohol level) or `strong' nearly pure alcohol (less popular).

You see, by NOT comparing - the stupid, the sheeple, who follow CNN's and the governments line on everything - don't even think of the comparison. Don't even think that when `they' use the legal alcohol that they don't drink `as much' of the high powered stuff as the low beer level. And, of course, the non-smoker - getting its viewpoint on pot from CNN - wouldn't know that when smokers are confronted with a `better' more potent pot - that they ALSO would use less --- just like the LEGAL drinkers.

You see, if CNN actually wanted to be `fair and balanced' (FOX's term) - we would hear the smokers point of view - but - we don't. THEY, CNN, have sheeple to lead and advertisers to protect. They, CNN, don't want to ruffle the feathers of those in government who feed them the `news' they depend upon for their revenue. So be it - if the news is unbalanced and meaningless. If it protects the advertisers (follow the money) - job done.

For more of what I think of the marijuana ruse -- read this - http://realheavypolitics.blogspot.com/2009/05/maines-new-marijuana-law-isnt-enough.html.

Thanks for visiting again today - please bookmark this website as I will update daily if I can - and again, please - send my link to someone who also agrees with the viewpoint you just read.

Now - Today's links:

Don’t Believe The Hype! Potent Pot, So What?

http://blog.norml.org/2009/05/14/dont-believe-the-hype-potent-pot-so-what/ To me, NORML has had the wrong strategy forever - that said - it is a great advocate and perhaps the best voice overall. This article makes one great point after another and is worthy of your click.

FDA Labels Cheerios A Drug Based On Labeling

http://www.fda.gov/foi/warning_letters/s7188c.htm And, for today's latest example of no common sense and our bloated government at all levels - read this.

Here's That Ridiculous Marijuana Potency Story By CNN

http://www.cnn.com/2009/HEALTH/05/14/marijuana.potency/index.html Enough coverage of propaganda.

British pub finds smoking ban loophole: report

http://www.physorg.com/news161412971.html Government action in England against smokers caused 2,000 pubs to go under since 2007's law. Here's an inventive way one Pub owner is challenging the law. `Local council' is still stating they will go after those smokers rights.

The Measure of a Boy - Government Style 1937

http://www.shorpy.com/node/6116?size=_original A little humor to end our week - how many government workers does it take to measure a boy? Answer - 11. Click this link to find a picture to find out why.