You’d Have To Be Stoned To Vote Democrat
Aug 25, 2014 Opinion, Political
Paul Bedard writes an article for the Washington Examiner where he indicates that if Democrats want to retain control of the Senate or limit losses the party should push marijuana legalization initiatives in November.
The reasoning is that if these initiatives are on the ballots the young (read pot smoking) Democrat voters will be compelled to vote and while they are voting for marijuana they will also vote for Democrats on the ballot.
This is probably true. The young want marijuana legalized and they would turn out to vote if it were on the ballot (assuming they were not too high to remember to vote) but can Democrats get these initiatives on the ballots by November?
And more importantly wouldn’t they, as Bedard points out, be more likely to hold off until 2016 to help keep a Democrat in the White House and pick up Democrat seats in Congress?
I am not a marijuana user, never have been and do not intend to start now. I think it could be legal and taxed and that it is probably no more dangerous than alcohol (and no, please do not tell me it is safer because it is not) but we need a lot of things in place. How do you determine driving under the influence of marijuana (other than people driving at 4 miles an hour)? THC (the active component in marijuana) is fat soluble and stays in the body long after the intoxicating effects have subsided. This is particularly true for habitual users.
How will law enforcement be able to determine if one is high or not when THC levels are present? This is important. States that have legalized marijuana have undoubtedly had an increase in use of the drug and that means more people are driving under the influence. They are a danger to others.
But I digress. The issue is should Democrats put marijuana on the ballot to increase Democrat voter turnout (especially among the young)?
Enticing voters with pot kind of signals desperation and would only bolster the impression that politicians will do anything to keep power.
Democrats would love to offer pot as an incentive. They like their voters to be zombies who follow along without question.
And they also know one has to be stoned to vote for a Democrat.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Can’t Spell POTUS Without POT
Jan 20, 2014 Commentary, Political
Barack Obama has suddenly become a health expert on marijuana, tobacco and alcohol. I guess Obama thinks that smoking weed, using coke, smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol makes him an expert on the subject.
I have made my position known in the past. Instead of spending billions to fight this drug we should legalize it and tax the hell out of it (say 40-50%) in order to increase revenue. The revenue (as well as the savings from the war on drugs) could be used to pay the debt and lower our income taxes. The real problem will be getting government to actually use the tax money to pay bills instead of using it to make more bills. It will also eventually lead to government declaring marijuana a right and that some folks can’t afford it so it needs to be subsidized. They will give away pot with Obamaphones. I would never use it so the issue will not affect me as long as government does not decide to use my tax dollars for pot related items.
Back to Barack. He wants marijuana made legal and he is out talking now about how it is no more dangerous than alcohol. Obama said that it is well known he smoked pot as a teen and that he viewed it no differently from smoking tobacco. Hey genius, tobacco does not cause one to get high. It does not impair one’s ability to do things.
So Barry said he does not think marijuana is any more dangerous than alcohol. That is likely true but we have quantitative methods to determine if a person is impaired by alcohol. How would we do that for marijuana when THC stays in the system for sometime and the levels stay high with repeated use? The person is not intoxicated but the levels are high so how do we measure? If we make marijuana legal there needs to be very strict laws about using it and driving and doing other things (like those where we would not allow alcohol) and the punishment needs to be severe.
Even if marijuana is no more dangerous than alcohol that still means it is dangerous (just no more so than alcohol).
Smoking marijuana causes cancer and if one is also a tobacco smoker the incidence of cancer greatly increases. Despite what the stoner crowd tells you, marijuana is not some wonder drug that causes no harm. There are serious effects on the body and long term use is detrimental. Perhaps there is a use for the products from marijuana (like THC being used to stimulate appetite in cancer patients) but make no mistake, it has harmful effects.
The real issue with regard to Obama is the inequality in the legal system. Obama is concerned that rich people who get caught with marijuana are less likely to suffer the harsh consequences of the legal system than are the middle class and the poor among us.
Yes, there are a lot of people on the middle and low end of the spectrum who are jailed or otherwise under the restraints of the legal system because of marijuana use. However, I strongly doubt that these problems are ONLY because of the marijuana. For many of these people marijuana possession or use is but one charge among others such as illegal possession of a firearm, possession/use of other drugs, burglary, assault, failure to appear, violation of probation, multiple past arrests and so on.
In other words, these folks are not angels who happened to have a little weed on them.
But Obama is one to never leave the inequality card at home so he makes the issue about the inequality of the legal system.
If he wants equality then how about we start with making it so all the citizens have the same standards and rules as the politicians? If people get caught intoxicated they can go to rehab and be allowed back to work just like a member of Congress. If someone gets caught not paying taxes or cheating on them then that person can get a pass just like members of Congress and members of the Obama staff.
I do not believe in equality of outcome. Everyone should have the same chance in life (and we all pretty much have the same opportunity) but what one does with the opportunities is what determines the outcome. Obama can’t grasp this concept for society at large (with regard to him and his daughters it is a different story) so he thinks everyone deserves (or, as liberals say, has a right) to the same outcome.
And by God if the outcome is not the same then big government needs to step in and fix it.
Suppose two people of similar means both receive a million dollars to do what they want with. The first guy parties and spends it all on lavish items and soon runs out of money and ends up bankrupt. The second guy invests the money in a small business and grows the business over time so that he is eventually making many times more than the million dollars he started with. He employs people, provides them great benefits and he prospers. He buys the things he put off while building his business and he establishes a great life for his family.
Which one would most people applaud? They both had the same opportunity and chose different paths so their outcome was not the same.
To Obama the first guy got shafted and the government needs to step in and take money from the second guy to make the first guy’s life better.
Obama is clueless.
Maybe all that pot he used in his youth did damage his brain after all…
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: cdc, inequality, lies, marijuana, Obama, pot smoker
Round Up Of The Absurd
Jun 14, 2013 Political
A sampling of the moronic things taking place in this country.
DC residents can apply for a pot card
BUT G_D FORBID THEY WANT TO GET OR CARRY A GUN.
Looks like people in DC can start registering to receive medical marijuana. The dope will be dispensed once people start getting their government approval to get high.
Don’t take this the wrong way. I think that marijuana can be of value as a medication for certain things. That is for the medical community to decide. The reality is that many folks will get a card for some bogus medical condition so they can get, and smoke, pot. There will be a huge spike in certain medical conditions and that spike will involve conditions that, coincidentally, can be treated with marijuana. There will not be background checks to see if these people have a valid reason, they will just be allowed to obtain and smoke pot.
Let some poor chump try to buy a gun, or better yet, try to get a permit to carry a gun in DC and the entire force of government will come down on the evil schmuck. If he is allowed to proceed there will be hundreds of dollars in fees and significant checks that will become huge barriers to purchasing a handgun. If the request is to carry a handgun then there will be a lot of money spent to be denied. This is just like the People’s Republik of Maryland.
One of these things is a right protected in the US Constitution. Sadly, very few people either know that or follow it.
Your Tax Dollars Pay For IRS Employees To Do Full Time Union Work
An FOIA request reveals information that should make your blood boil. It is not bad enough that the IRS is targeting certain people in a political witch hunt now we have information that 201 IRS employees work full time on union business and we TAXPAYERS foot the bill.
The collective bargaining agreement allows them to work full time on union business and receive a taxpayer provided salary. This is what happens when the people who pay the bills are not involved in the bargaining process. The union negotiates with the politicians and they agree on terms. We pay for whatever they decide AND the unions funnel money back to the politicians. They are a laundering operation to get your money to unions and politicians under the guise of a legal contract.
This is why public employees should not be allowed to have unions.
Nazi passed background check to live in US for over 60 years
A Nazi commander from WWII was able to escape to the United States in 1949 by claiming he had not performed military service. He lied. The US allegedly did a background check but some items could not be verified so they let him in. The 94 year old man has been exposed and will likely be deported to stand trial for war crimes.
Big deal, right? Well, if the government could not ensure a Nazi was not allowed into this country what makes you think the government can ensure the millions of illegals currently here are properly vetted before legal status is bestowed upon them?
How many of these folks will be allowed to stay here legally because their background could NOT be verified? How many mistakes will there be that will cause us problems?
This assumes, of course, that the government will actually do any kind of background check. The only people the government wants to do complete background checks on are those who wish to purchase or carry a firearm. Then, anal probes are conducted.
The world is upside-down and this country needs an enema.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Pot Seized
Nov 6, 2010 Political
So, did you hear the “great” news that tons of pot has been seized? Reports I’ve seen vary from 10 tons to 30 tons (now Adam will argue I’m a liar, but who cares?). Don’t you feel safe, now that all that pot is off the street? After all, it was around $20 million worth of drugs. And heck, the US only spent around $40 billion this year (so far) on the drug war to do such things. Isn’t it wonderful that in today’s economy we can continue to spend literally tens of billions of dollars collecting this natural, safe plant?
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
No Bogartin’ Allowed
May 15, 2009 Political
I’ll probably hear differences with some of my more conservative colleagues about this, but I feel that it’s time to revamp our drug laws, especially with regard to marijuana and the laws relating to its possession.
First, as a disclaimer, I grew up in the sixties, and I inhaled- repeatedly. Many people did in that time, and I don’t judge one way or another, but for purposes of this discussion, we will keep this in the present day.
There is a problem here, in that many of the laws regarding the drug marijuana are rooted in yesterday’s culture, where marijuana was lumped in with heroin and cocaine as to it’s relative toxicity and addictive qualities, and the truth is that it is nowhere near these other two in terms of addiction. I can’t speak to the mindset for putting marijuana in with the other drugs, but it is time to reclassify this drug, and eliminate many of the offenses that put people in jail for simple possession. Possession is a victimless crime, and simple possession should be either legalized or made a fine- able offense.
The problem as I see it, is that we have several groups who want to make money off of this drug if it is legalized- the “Medical Marijuana” group, the Federal government, with taxes, the various state governments, with taxes, the Big Tobacco growers, since tobacco is such a reviled crop, not to mention the cartels, who have no interest in legalization, because that loses them a chunk of their profits, unless they partnered with Big Tobacco.
Everybody wants a taste of all the money, and thus nothing gets done, because everyone’s interests are counter to everyone else’s interest, and status quo rules. Meanwhile, people get thrown in jail who have no place or real reason to be there. That said, they DID break the law, and as is said, ignorance of the law is no excuse.
So the law needs to be changed, and this needs to be changed at the most basic level, because the profit motive needs to be lessened, if not eliminated from the equation. The only way this could possibly work is to eliminate the profit motive from the illegal networks that have profited over the years to the tune of millions of dollars, and thousands of people killed.
There is only one way to do this, I believe. The Government must legalize marijuana for private individual consumption, and allow the growth of up to ten plants per year for this personal consumption. Driving while smoking marijuana should have a penalty the same as that of alcohol, with a legal threshhold of allowable blood cannabis level.
I know the government dearly wants to have a part of taxable income from this, but I believe that they should refrain, for the simple reason that to do so will encourage smuggling of marijuana, and keep the cartels in business, and that would not be a good thing- the idea is to eliminate the profit motive.
Now as to the cartels and the dealers- while I would press for legalizing the personal consumption of marijuana, I would also have the Death Penalty for anyone caught dealing any drug- period. This would, through attrition, if nothing else, lessen demand for all other drugs. Heroin, cocaine, oxycontin, any drug, including the sale of marijuana, would be punished by death. I say that this is justified because heroin, cocaine, and other drugs destroy not just individuals, but whole families, and the dealers who sell these drugs, have no morals in doing so, and can and will try to sell to someone trying to kick the habit.
Now, as to the people hooked on these drugs, heroin, cocaine, etc., I would give them three strikes,so to speak- sending them to re-hab clinics three times before criminal charges kick in, providing they did not do additional criminal acts that would warrant imprisonment. The idea, after all, is to get these people off the addictive drugs, and back into society, and I feel this could do this.
I know some people will object to my idea for the Death Penalty for the dealers- heck, we have had spirited debate over murder, so I expect that some will object to this as well, but I feel that if the penalty is onerous, perhaps some, if not all of these people might choose a different line of work post haste. The rest of them would not bother the addicts anymore, and the addicts, without a source, would begin to heal.
Only if we take the profit motive out of the marijuana trade will we begin to be able to form a rational policy around the legalization of this contentious weed. The Chinese have chewed the seeds of marijuana for headaches for oh, about three thousand years, and we know that smoking marijuana decreases nausea in chemo patients, and eases the discomfort and pressure of Glaucoma. What else could it do?
We just do not know, because of the “narcotic” stigma that has been unfairly slapped on this plant, and it is time for the laws to come into the twenty- first century regarding this plant and the other drugs. A legal overhaul is badly needed, and I believe only the most calcified in their thinking could believe that the current laws work.
We need this discussion, and we need this ASAP.
There is too much at stake for society as a whole, to stand pat.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]
Tags: cartels, death penalty, marijuana, rehab