Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Senator, You Used to Be a Pot Head -- Now You're Talking Like a Narc

By Norman Kent, AlterNet. Posted July 6, 2007.


A letter to GOP Sen. Norm Coleman from a former college friend asking why he supports brutal drug laws when he was an avid pot smoker as a young man.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Norman Kent

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

Editor's Note: The following is a letter addressed to Minnesota Republican Senator Norm Coleman -- a strong advocate of the brutal federal drug laws on the books -- reminding him that he used to be a happy, safe, fun-loving pot smoker.

My friend Norman,

Years ago, in a lifetime far away, you did not oppose the legalization of marijuana. Years ago, in our dorm rooms at Hofstra University, you, me, Billy, your future brother-in-law, Ivan, Jonathan, Peter, Janet, Nancy and a wealth of other students smoked dope.

Sure, we had to tape the doors shut, burn incense and open the windows, but we got high, and yet we grew up okay, without the help of the Office of National Drug Control Policy's advice.

We grew up to become lawyers. Our other friends, as you go down the list, are doctors, professors, parents, political consultants and professionals. No one ever got cancer from smoking pot or diabetes from using a joint. And the days of our youth we look back fondly upon as years where we stood up, were counted and made a difference, from Earth Day in 1970 to helping bring down a president and end a war in Southeast Asia a few years later. We smoked pot when we took over Weller Hall to protest administrative abuses of students' rights. You smoked pot as you stood on the roof of the University Senate protesting faculty exclusivity. As the President of the Student Senate in 1969, you condemned the raid by Nassau County police on our dormitories, busting scores of students for pot possession.

You never said then that pot was dangerous. What was scary then, and is as frightening now, is when national leaders become voices of hypocrisy, harbingers of the status quo, and protect their own position instead of the public good. Welcome to the crowd of those who have become a likeness of which they despised. Welcome to the mindless myriad of legislators who gather in cocktail lounges to manhandle their martinis while passing laws against drunk driving.

We have seen more people die last year from spinach then pot. We have endured generations of drug addicts overdosing on a multitude of drugs, from heroin to crystal methamphetamine. In your public life, as an attorney general, mayor and United States senator, you have been in the forefront of speaking out against abuses which are harmful. You have been a noble and honorable public servant. How about not being such a dope on dope?

How about admitting that if the Rockefeller drug laws were applied to Norman Bruce Coleman on Long Island in 1968, or to me, or to our friends, and fellow students, you, I and others we knew and loved might just be getting out of jail now? How about recognizing that for too long too many have been wrongly arrested, unjustly prosecuted and illegally incarcerated for unconscionable periods of time?

How about recognizing that you have peers who have smoked pot for 25 years or more and they are successful record producers, businessmen and parents?

How about standing up and saying you have heard and witnessed countless stories of persons who have used pot medicinally, as I have, to endure the effects of chemotherapy?

You who have travelled to Africa and seen the face of AIDS so up close and personal would deny medicinal marijuana relief to those souls wasting away from malnutrition, nausea and no access to fundamental medicines?

How about not adopting the sad and sorry archaic path of our office of drug control, which this week suggested pot smokers are more likely to become gang members than others?

How about standing up and saying: "I, Norm Coleman, smoked pot in 1969." That "I am not a gang member, a drug addict or a criminal."

How about saying: "I was able to responsibly integrate my prior pot use into my life, and still succeed on my own merits."

How about standing up not only for who you are, but who you were?

How about it, Norm?

I will always love, admire and cherish what you have achieved and accomplished and the goals you have met. I will always fondly look at the remarkable success of your present.

How about you looking back at your past and saying: "What I did was not so wrong and not so bad and not so hurtful that generations of Americans should still, decades later, be going to jail for smoking pot -- nearly one million arrests for possession last year."

Can't Norm Coleman come out of the closet in 2007 and say "These arrests are wrong -- that there is a better way, and we need to find it."

You might find more integrity and honor in that then adopting the sad and sorry policy of our Office of National Drug Control Policy.

You might find the person you were.

Norm Kent

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: norm coleman, marijuana

Norm Kent is an attorney based in Ft. Lauderdale, FL, who specializes in criminal defense and appeals, media law and First Amendment issues. He serves on the Board of Directors for NORML, the National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Out all the hypocrits
Posted by: SENILEBIKER on Jul 6, 2007 12:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Someone should start up a web site where former friends and fellow students of the current political elite can out their erstwhile friends for smoking dope while studying etc.

Just how many of those in the capitol and the administration can honestly say that they have never used a drug of any kind?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I'm sure there are a few Posted by: ateo
» RE: I'm sure there are a few Posted by: orwellwasn'tdreaming
» RE: I'm sure there are a few Posted by: theoblivionofnow
» RE: Out all the hypocrits Posted by: Beagle17
» RE: Out all the hypocrits Posted by: shanaza
» Excellent idea nc Posted by: Beck
Hypocrisy or enlightenment?
Posted by: EagleMB on Jul 6, 2007 2:13 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just because a person once used pot does not make him a hypocrite for opposing pot use. Certainly it would be hypocritical to currently use pot while simultaneously opposing it, but times change. The average pot user in the 60’s and 70’s is not the same as the average pot user today. Pot is more of a gateway drug today then it was in the past.

In fact, I trust drug control policies implemented by former pot users than I do from bureaucrats who have never experienced it first hand.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Pfft . . . Posted by: KaptainSpiffy
» RE: Hypocrisy or enlightenment? Posted by: drmflorida
» Try reading your source Posted by: sausage
» RE: Try reading your source Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Try reading your source Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Try reading your source Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Try reading your source Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Try reading your source Posted by: YogiBear
» Pot kettle moment for EagleMB Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Which is my point exactly... Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» RE: Which is my point exactly... Posted by: indepentent
» RE: What stoned kid? Posted by: lessbread
» RE: What stoned kid? Posted by: EagleMB
» Hypocrisy Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: No, ignorance!!! Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: No, ignorance!!! Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: No, ignorance!!! Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Hypocrisy or enlightenment? Posted by: Future Humans
» RE: ignorance or denial? Posted by: imcnotu
» RE: ignorance or denial? Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: ignorance or denial? Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Hypocrisy or enlightenment? Posted by: rambleman
» EXCELLENT Posted by: deborama
» How do YOU know? Posted by: mirimac
» RE: How do YOU know? Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» Yabbut Posted by: ssegallmd
» RE: How do YOU know? Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: How do YOU know? Posted by: whatzaname
» RE: How do YOU know? Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Hypocrisy or enlightenment? Posted by: angel2007
» RE: Hypocrisy or enlightenment? Posted by: mgmyers79
» RE: What about the past? Posted by: lessbread
» RE: What about the past? Posted by: EagleMB
» RE: Hypocrisy or enlightenment? Posted by: indepentent
» Another kind of hypocrisy, then? Posted by: grailsnail
» ASSUMPTION.... Posted by: gellero
» RE: ASSUMPTION.... Posted by: EagleMB
adults today are scared kids (on the playground of life)
Posted by: nor cal surfer on Jul 6, 2007 4:09 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
just trying to pay The Man back for all their life's accruments.

much easier at 21 to spark a fatty on the front lawn and flip the bird at the establishment. do it at 41, and your neighbors are no longer the ones waking up at noon for a ten AM class.

the devil's in DC, happy we're preoccupied w/Horatio Alger Jr.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Right... Posted by: ateo
Are there any real “Legalize Pot” politicians or parties?
Posted by: White middleclass male on Jul 6, 2007 4:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would be in favor of legalizing marijuana for everything from medical to recreational use. The only problem I have is the only people taking seriously about this issue are jokes.

Is there any one in the political theater that can be taken seriously on the “legalize it” issue?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» NORML isn't a joke Posted by: Coleman
» Dear Mr Coleman, Posted by: eddie torres
» RE: NORML isn't a joke? Posted by: Lauren
Draconian laws and a phoney war on drugs save the US military money
Posted by: Suzon on Jul 6, 2007 4:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's one story of how it's done.

My son was pestered by his former platoon sergeant (illegal) to get him some marijuana (his platoon sergeant had been charged with forgery and fraud and turning in a "criminal" would help him gain clemency).

The first thing that his Army "defense" attorney told him was, "We can give you 47 years for this!" He was forced to give up his constitutional rights (illegal) in order to plea bargain. (What 24 year old would take a chance on 47 years in prison?)

In the Army, possession of a small amount of marijuana carries the same penalty as a truckload of crack cocaine. They knew my son was not a dealer because he made no profit, only passed the marijuana on at cost.

In the court martial, the empaneled officers (not his peers) all swore neither they nor anyone in their families had any drug history (again, not a jury of his peers). His "defense" attorney used the pejorative term "drugs" instead of "marijuana" or "cannabis" twice as frequently as the prosecuting attorney.

Fortunately at the trial my son told the truth, that he had been repeatedly asked by his former platoon sergeant to obtain a small amount and that he had ignored or refused this. (I believe that my son had gone out celebrating his birthday and that his judgment had been impaired by that legal drug, alcohol. The former platoon sergeant was working at the desk of the barracks.)

My son was given a one year sentence and shipped from Texas to the ironically-named Ft Bliss prison in Kansas. Nice touch that, as far away from the heavily populated East and West coasts as possible! We began to put together an appeal. When he was released in eight months, he was still on the Army roster but left to fend for himself financially.

18 months after the trial, his conviction was overturned by the US Court of Military Review on the grounds that the trial judge had turned a blind eye to his genuine innocence. He could have a retrial (but by the same people who had stitched him up in the first place) or leave the army with a neutral discharge. Sensibly he chose the latter.

Nevertheless, he was refused the VA educational benefits he had joined the Army for on the grounds that the offence he had been *charged* with was serious. (Right, something that would have cost him a $100 fine in his home state of California!)

So the Army got to keep him on the roster for 18 months without pay and they got to keep the money he'd paid into the VA fund. And he was one of the lucky ones!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» What a dumb bastard Posted by: White middleclass male
» However true that may be... Posted by: ssegallmd
» RE: What a dumb bastard Posted by: ssegallmd
The most shocking news here...
Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal on Jul 6, 2007 4:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...is that people seem actually shocked about the hypocrisy of a politician...especially a Repuke.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Francis
Posted by: Francis on Jul 6, 2007 5:09 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Norm Coleman is a political whore and a fraud. But in these respects he is no different than his future political opponent, Al Franken. Pity the people of Minnesota who's only choice is between these two pathetic slimeballs.

Franken is an unreconstructed racist and Likud sympathizer. In other words 60 years ago, with a different religious affiliation, he would have been a a good little Nazi.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Francis Posted by: tweedster
» RE: Francis Posted by: Francis
» RE: Francis Posted by: carcinoid112
» RE: Francis Posted by: Francis
» RE: Francis Posted by: singer222
» RE: Francis Posted by: Francis
The most self righteous
Posted by: cmaukonen on Jul 6, 2007 6:08 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The most self righteous people are those who have "gotten religion". They are also the most hypocritical.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The most self righteous Posted by: grailsnail
Who's making the money from illegal pot?
Posted by: sausage on Jul 6, 2007 6:13 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here's my short list of people and institutions making money by keeping marijuana illegal : Narcotics police, the drug rehabilitation industry, politicians. In other words, parasites on the body politic, leeches of taxpayer money, who, if marijuana were ever legalized, might have to find real jobs.

There is another group who are satisfied with marijuana's current illegal status: young, white, suburban professionals who deal to their friends for extra, unreportable, nontaxable income, in cash. My evidence is anecdotal but my source is unimpeachable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Oh, and another thing... Posted by: sausage
» RE: Oh, and another thing... Posted by: idmaster2000
» RE: Who's making the money from illegal pot? Posted by: disgustedandamused
He probably still smokes pot and his "anti-pot" crusades are to cover his own actions
Posted by: veggiegrrrl on Jul 6, 2007 6:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
He probably still smokes pot and his "anti-pot" crusades are to cover his own actions the way priests pray for God's will and then molest children.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Interesting 1/2 the story
Posted by: BenCaxton12 on Jul 6, 2007 7:07 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Back in his day, Norm Coleman wasn't just another pot smoker ... he was one of the 3 or 4 big-name 'campus revolutionaries' at Hofstra.

His political alignment changed LITERALLY the week after graduation -- triggering speculation among his former associates about Norman's relationship with the Nassau County District Attorney's Office,with Hofstra Administration and certain "how did they know THAT" incidents.

This article would be the first indication I've seen to the effect that Norm WASN'T a Snitch when he was an undergraduate -- none of HIS friends got busted, it seems.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» True, true .. Posted by: BenCaxton12
"Wipe that stupid smile off your face....."
Posted by: picket on Jul 6, 2007 7:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
John Calvin descendants are extremely irritated. USA is a civilized nation so those puritans now days do not burn peaceful "euphoric" humans at the stake or openly murder those who deviate from strict moral codes and recreational taboos. In the interim... a country with the greatest prison population in the history of the world will suffice.......25 years to life with a little torture thrown in for breaking an unjust law....and wow the return on the investment is great!!!!

The "country club" puritans will smoke their big cigars and plot out due punishment for those they consider naturally depraved all the while sipping the greatest scotch money can buy and thinking up ways to abuse poor citizens.

For those ignorant deceived puritans doing the dirty work of their masters...there is a great reward waiting for loyalty above and beyond the call of duty.. not in this world but in the one to come. Onward loyal soldier!!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Sorry, you cannot rate your own comment....
Posted by: picket on Jul 6, 2007 7:41 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have not ever rated my own comment. This is the second time this note has popped up on my comment. What is the problem??????????

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Gateways
Posted by: InsertNameHere on Jul 6, 2007 7:50 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Smoking pot didn't serve as a gateway drug to most of the people, I went to school with. There were a few kids who got into heroin and I think that is because they started hanging around people who did heroin.

Most of us started smoking cigarettes first, which contains a far more dangerous yet freely available drug, nicotine. Alcohol can be dangerous as well, but can be safe when used moderately. You can't really say that for cigarettes, so why didn't they start the War On Drugs by targeting Big Tobacco? Oh yeah, because it's BS.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» meanig of 'gateway drug' Posted by: kathat
» RE: meanig of 'gateway drug' Posted by: ssegallmd
» RE: meanig of 'gateway drug' Posted by: cbrislain
» RE: meanig of 'gateway drug' Posted by: ssegallmd
somebody send one of these to Hillary
Posted by: schnoggi on Jul 6, 2007 8:36 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
who she was in college would probably kill herself if she saw what she was to become

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Learn from Experience
Posted by: bookwoman on Jul 6, 2007 9:13 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One of my friends is a fervent anti drug fighter. This is the same man who was spazed out from 1960 until 1972. He managed to get clean and sober and hasn't had drugs or alcohol since then. He said he doesn't want anyone else to get into the mess he did and lose years of their life.

Sometimes people who did the drug thing and are now dead set against them are the ones who learned the worst lessons of their lives while high.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ex-Junkie, Reformed Drunk ... Posted by: BenCaxton12
legalize marijuana
Posted by: vasumurti on Jul 6, 2007 9:33 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As a former pot smoker, I'm not in a position to be critical of others for their past or present marijuana use, be it Norm Coleman or Albert Gore III. I've been drug, alcohol, and caffeine free, except chocolate :) for 16 years now, and plan to remain like this the rest of my life.

But just as there are millions of Americans who don't drink, but who don't have a problem with other people drinking, or with alcohol being legal, so I also don't have a problem with people around me using mild forms of intoxication, such as alcohol, caffeine, tobacco, or marijuana.

Over 400,000 marijuana arrests are made annually, costing the nation billions of dollars in police and court time and prison space. Richard Posner, Chicago's chief federal appeals judge, and one of the nation's leading legal scholars, says marijuana should be legalized as a way of reducing crime.

"It is nonsense that we should be devoting so many law enforcement resources to marijuana," said Posner. "I am skeptical that a society that is so tolerant of alcohol and cigarettes should come down so hard on marijuana use and send people to prison for life without parole...Only decriminalization is a sure route to a lower crime rate. It is sad that it appears so far below the horizon of political feasibility."

Christians are unable to distinguish Hinduism from Judaism or Islam. Intoxication is not forbidden in the Hindu religious tradition...it is merely considered "low-class."

Prostitution was legal in ancient Hindu society for the same reason the Prohibition of alcohol failed in the United States.

Commenting on Srimad Bhagavatam 1.11.19, A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami writes:

"By tricks of chance, one may be obliged to adopt a profession which is not very adorable in society...even in those days, about five thousand years ago, there were prostitutes in a city like Dwarka...This means that prostitutes are necessary citizens for the proper upkeep of society.

"The government opens wine shops, but this does not mean that the government encourages the drinking of wine. The idea is that there is a class of men who will drink at any cost, and it has been experienced that prohibition in great cities encouraged illicit smuggling of wine.

"Similarly, men who are not satisfied at home require such concessions...It is better that prostitutes be available in the marketplace so that the sanctity of society can be maintained."

Again, as a former pot smoker, I'm not in a position to be critical of others for their past or present marijuana use.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Beware of Those Who See the Light
Posted by: Gravitas on Jul 6, 2007 10:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Reformed "sinners" are always the worst. There was St Augustine who was quite the playboy before his conversion. After, he preached that sexuality was what drew men away from God and left a legacy of guilt we are still dealing with. Then there are those who lose weight - like Dixie's dieting demagogue Huckabee, who puts kids weights on report cards. Some theorize that deep inside, they can't trust themselves. So they need to fight for external rules to compensate for their own weakness. Others say they are just being slick, turning their "failings" into power over others - look at me, look at me and how I reformed. Of course they want to make their issue as important as possible; the more important the more we look. Either way it is all about them imposing their neurosis on the rest of us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pot is different now
Posted by: kathat on Jul 6, 2007 10:21 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Come on, I smoked it in the sixties, and it was nothing. You paid your 5.00 for a baggie and you giggled and ate a lot. No longlasting effects.
The pot now has way more thc and is aften laced with additives. It keeps you messed up most of the day.People shouldn't be able to drive on it for sure. I don't think they should go to prison for life etc... but the pot is way more of a drug than it was back then.
I smoked it back then, but I wouldn't want my granchildren to experience this new drug.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: pot is different now Posted by: b_cheater21
» so, it's a plant? Posted by: elfinito
» RE: so, it's a plant? Posted by: b_cheater21
» If it is stronger... Posted by: aonghus36
» not this again Posted by: Jeo567
» RE: pot is different now Posted by: leighsure
» RE: pot is different now Posted by: whatzaname
» complete bullshit Posted by: deborama
» RE: pot is different now Posted by: mrb1960
» RE: pot is different now Posted by: jroth420
Speaking of drugs, Coleman wants to push Rush Limbaugh on your kids
Posted by: eddie torres on Jul 6, 2007 10:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Coleman and Jim DeMint (R-SC) introduced the "Broadcaster Freedom Act of 2007" (S.1748) to restrict the FCC from re-imposing the 'Fairness Doctrine' on US broadcasters.

The application of the 'Fairness Doctrine' would expose the dominance of pro-GOP speech from shills like Limbaugh and Savage in a majority of corporate-controlled radio markets across the US.

Just guessing, but Coleman and DeMint are loading up on campaign money from broadcaster and media PACs in exchange for whoring this bill.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Coleman is not all bad.
Posted by: HughScott on Jul 6, 2007 10:45 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Not mentioned by Norm’s “good friend” is the fact that, in January 2007, he joined two other Republican Senators, John Warner and Susan Collins, and voiced his opposition to Bush's troop surge.

While I’m for legalizing marijuana, the issue can wait until our troops are out of Iraq.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Coleman is not all bad. Posted by: leighsure
myths debunked...
Posted by: Ghoulman on Jul 6, 2007 11:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor;