AlterNet / By Norman Kent
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 293

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

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.
July 6, 2007  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest headlines via email.

 
 
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
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.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest AlterNet headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: marijuana, norm coleman

comments COMMENTS ( 293 )
READ COMMENTS
LOGIN OR REGISTER TO POST A COMMENT
 

Comments are closed-

Out all the hypocrits
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Hypocrisy or enlightenment?
[Report this comment]
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: LMNOP
» 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

Comments are closed-

adults today are scared kids (on the playground of life)
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Are there any real “Legalize Pot” politicians or parties?
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Draconian laws and a phoney war on drugs save the US military money
[Report this comment]
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
» RE: What a dumb bastard Posted by: LMNOP

Comments are closed-

The most shocking news here...
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Francis
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

The most self righteous
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Who's making the money from illegal pot?
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

He probably still smokes pot and his "anti-pot" crusades are to cover his own actions
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Interesting 1/2 the story
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

"Wipe that stupid smile off your face....."
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Sorry, you cannot rate your own comment....
[Report this 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]

Comments are closed-

Gateways
[Report this comment]
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: cbrislain

Comments are closed-

somebody send one of these to Hillary
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Learn from Experience
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

legalize marijuana
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Beware of Those Who See the Light
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

pot is different now
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Speaking of drugs, Coleman wants to push Rush Limbaugh on your kids
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Coleman is not all bad.
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

myths debunked...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ghoulman on Jul 6, 2007 11:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... there's already a few posts insisting that 60 year old myths about pot are still true.

* Pot today is more potent, even dangerous.
- No.

* It's a "gateway drug".
- This is a political word, not a medical one. The GOP made it up.

* It's worse than cigarettes.
- Actually, weed is medically beneficial. Even smoked it burns at a lower temperature than cigarettes and have no additives while cigarettes have 160 poisons in each one. And hey, you can always use a vaporizer.

* It's addictive.
- No one sucked cock behind a 7-11 for weed.

* It's damaging to the brain.
- That's booze dumbass.

* People have died.
- 5000 years of use and still not one death. Not even a medical problem.

I could go on I suppose. But I would like to point out that even the American Medical Establishment has come out to support Cannibus as a pain reliever much more effective and healthy than the hard drugs doctors have forced upon patients for generations.

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

» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: Ghoulman
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: cbrislain
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: wisegalah
» RE: wisegalah is a liar Posted by: Ghoulman
» sources please Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: Brasilaaron
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: jroth420
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: Mr. Heathen

Comments are closed-

with all the problems Bush has...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: eosrk on Jul 6, 2007 12:51 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...he's hitting the pot too...for his sanity.

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

Comments are closed-

We Need All Our Senses, But Don't Condemn for Miscreant Moments
[Report this comment]
Posted by: edgar_michel on Jul 6, 2007 1:33 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anything that takes us away from the path of excellence is not in our interest. Anything that momentarily alleviates the pain without solving the problem only exacerbates the peril of our condition. That substance that perniciously injures our ability to achieve our maximum potential continues century after century to be consumed to the detriment of mankind without the merits of its use ever questioned. Smoking Pot is not the detriment of which I speak, but it does serve as a model upon that of which I do speak can be considered. Though Pot does not immediately render the individual incapacitated or unable to further care for his or her self, it does dull the edge of excellence for just a moment allowing one to believe that they therefore feel better. They are not better, nor is their condition better, they just for a moment feel that they are better. There has been no solution to the root cause of their condition, for which they sought relief, and it was relief they were seeking, and so they have accomplished nothing in the interest of improving their lot. But for a moment they feel better, leading to the false impression that something has indeed improved. For the one who momentarily strolls into this momentary illusion of wellbeing, any avenue of departure is cut of by those who now condemn the mere incursion in that world as a sign of mortal weakness and signature of enfeeblement. So for a momentary stroll into the world of illusory comfort, one is forever stained with the stigma of being unable to envision real relief from the ragged edge of existence and precluded from ever contributing to the solution to the root cause of the pain and raggedness. It is sad that any people would ever condemn any of their brethren, for their momentary hopes of relief in a substance, considering just bow ragged the edge of life has become. It is utterly understandable that anyone existing today or 30 years ago would wish that something, anything would ease the pain of life, and considering the Iraq war and the utter rejection of the reality of global warming and its underlying causes, there is plenty of pain being created every second. How then can anyone be forever castigated for hoping that maybe there was an easier way than the way of personal triumph, which in the present setting looks extremely daunting? Of course the activity of smoking pot does nothing to improve any of our lives, but the entombment of all who stray here or there from the path of realizing their own excellence surely only inflames the ragged edge of existence much more than the momentary stroll into the world of illusionary ease could have ever inflamed. While I don’t believe that there is any merit in smoking marijuana, I think there is even less merit in marking for life one who does stroll along that path. If the smoking of marijuana has become so pernicious that we as a society can no longer function, then perhaps some short-term corrective action might be imaginable, something like 30 days at hard labor on something like a city farming project that improves the health of all, but I don’t think that this is the case. However for someone to impose corrective action on someone else who like the first person took that stroll and that first person never admits having taken that stroll, then rather than smoothing the ragged edge of life, that first person is in fact making the edge of life just that more ragged. Oh by the way, the substance of which I was speaking of in the first place was alcohol and all the other substances which cripple the mind.

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

» What we need are paragraphs Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

gateway drug
[Report this comment]
Posted by: cbrislain on Jul 6, 2007 1:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh come on. This is rhetoric straight out of DARE. A gateway to what? or do you even know? Would it be a "gateway" to other illegal drugs if it wasn't illegal? Is the illicit quality of the drug really the gateway that is being entered, and not anything fundamental to the drug itself? By far, the most negative effect of smoking marijuana is that it is a criminal act. Smoking it transforms every person who engages in this harmless activity into a criminal. What they do from there, is anybody's guess.

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

» RE: gateway drug Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: gateway drug Posted by: morticia
» RE: gateway drug Posted by: LeeAnnG
» RE: gateway drug Posted by: Fade
» RE: gateway drug Posted by: Brasilaaron

Comments are closed-

I'm smoking pot right now
[Report this comment]
Posted by: famouspipeliner on Jul 6, 2007 5:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What are you neo prudes going to do about it?

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

» RE: I'm smoking pot right now TOO! Posted by: Brasilaaron

Comments are closed-

The real issue here is ...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: skoog5600 on Jul 6, 2007 5:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
about Norm Coleman who is the biggest phony, hypocrit and a man that lacks any integrity. Having grown up in MN, when this man took to the political stage he was a democrat at one point, then changed signed on with the devil (Chaney & Bush) and is a republican. From that point on the face of MN politics has changed. What was once a liberal, community oriented state has become fractured and dare I say at times hateful. Wait, this sounds like most of the US these days.

No the issue is not pot here folks, there are a number of former pot smoking politicians who are for tough drug laws, the issue is integrity and accountability.

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

Comments are closed-

It's not just Coleman
[Report this comment]
Posted by: VAGreen on Jul 6, 2007 5:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately, the War on Drugs is the conventional wisdom of the out-of-touch Beltway crowd. It's why national supermajorities of 75% in the real world who favor allowing medical marijuana don't get anywhere.

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

Comments are closed-

Green bud? Fresh? Hello!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: A rope leash on Jul 6, 2007 6:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's plenty of hypocrisy to go around when it comes to pot use and pot laws. Frankly, I've been smoking it for 35 years now, and I've only been busted once. I have many friends and acquaintences who are quite the same.

You see, we are addicted. We'd rather be high than straight. It's a smoking habit, like tobacco, only not so horrid on the withdrawal. When we go without, we get grumpy and depressed, have trouble sleeping and pooping, and tend to talk way too much. Trust me, it's not nearly as bad as being a drunkard, which was one of my previous careers.

I have driven literally hundreds of thousands of miles under the influence of marijuana with no major incidents. I've lived in many different cities in the USA, and have recieved many kudos and accolades in my life for work that I have done for major corporations. However, I now find myself without a job, and with little hope of landing one, due to the fact that even the lowliest position requires that I pass a chemical examination of my bodily fluids. Add this to the pile of hypocrisy and unfairness that surrounds this wonderful plant. A coke or crank user is clean inside of a week, an opiate user is the same. Pot users are dirty for months. They probably won't check for hallucinogens or alcohol, nor the myriad of prescription medications available. Any addict who stops long enough to pass the test will go right back when he shows clear.

What a joke. Hey, if you smoked cigarettes and had to quit to land an ordinary job, you would be screaming, because that's how bad tobacco addiction is. Pot smokers don't have a leg to stand on because it's against the law, and even though a majority of people think it should be decriminalized, we see no movement in that direction...indeed, we now see the corporations getting in on the enforcement by demanding to see your juice. So much for government by The People.

Hemp is a wonderful plant It's basically immoral not to use it to its full potential. Yes, I'm addicted to the flower of the plant, but I'm no monster. In fact, I'm much better for it...and a much better person than I was when I was drunk.

The drug war is a huge money wheel ridden by lawyers, judges, police officers, prison gaurds, and even the drug dealers themselves. The law "fights" drugs, and yet there never seems to be any real progress...gee I wonder why...

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

» RE: Green bud? Fresh? Hello! Posted by: A rope leash
» Testing...Testing Posted by: famouspipeliner
» RE: Testing...Testing Posted by: A rope leash
» I'm a nerd Posted by: ateo
» RE: I'm a nerd Posted by: A rope leash
» Funny and true Posted by: ateo

Comments are closed-

Just curious. To what does EagleBM refer,
[Report this comment]
Posted by: No.mad on Jul 6, 2007 6:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
or is it the obvious?

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

Comments are closed-

Norm Coleman and Jeff Spicoli - Separated at Birth
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Future Humans on Jul 6, 2007 6:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder what the Norm Coleman of 1970 would say to the Norm Coleman of 2007?
Future Humans

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

Comments are closed-

Now that I have seen that photo of him ba in the day
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Bobsays on Jul 7, 2007 11:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I definitely puffed with him. Norm, you motherfucker - how you got away with it for all those years!

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

Comments are closed-

WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND
[Report this comment]
Posted by: nikolai on Jul 7, 2007 1:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've always disliked that phrase, almost as much as, "Pay it forward." Jezus, makes ya wanna vomit, doesn't it? I digress, however. In this case "What goes around comes around" may actually be appropriate to describe the MJ madness. The oldsters of whom most are no longer with us like Bing Crosby, for example, said, "Legalize marijuana? Sure, why not? When I was a young man nothing was thought of smoking hemp, it was considered to be like having a drink or two." But then in the late 30's "reefer madness" swept the country, and a new generation was indoctrinated with how evil, addictive and dangerous pot was, and those evil images of the " devilweed" were introduced at such a young age and so ingrained in Americans, that this "pot propaganda" resulting in "pot prohibition" was pretty damn effective. Now however, THAT generation is dying off, and the hippies of the 60's are becoming the elders, so the pendulum is swinging back the other way. Also, most young Americans now are much more sophisticated than their parents were by say, the (voting) age of 18, and KNOW that marijuana prohibition is unnecessary, and that the marijuana laws are indeed draconian and that enforcement of these bad laws is a waste of tax dollars. In time the marijuana laws will be eased, but in my opinion marijuana will never be fully legalized in the U.S. as neither the "bad guys" nor the "good guys" want it legal as it is a big underground money maker for the "bad guys" (when they don't get busted which is a chance they are more than willing to take) and too big a revenue generator for the "good guys" when they do get busted, since there are new prisons being built then filled to capacity with pot "dealers", and then there are those juicy property seizures, and of course employment for scores of cops like the DEA, ATF, etal, and local police, sheriffs, etc as well. Bottom line, if you can't figure out why something makes absolutely no sense (like the antiquated U.S. marijuana laws) follow the money trail. Marijuana is no different than anything else when it comes to the almighty dollar; legalization would cost way too much for many powerful (and semi-powerful) people on both sides of the law-enforcement fence, not to mention the fact that LESS police would then be needed (so the cops are going to fight legalization to their collective dying breath) and also the elite would lose a measure of their power and control over the typical U.S. citizen. Now, as far as medical usage, I do eventually see the day when folks will be able to obtain it legally for medical reasons, as this is already happening somewhat, and there IS a sizable demand for it which will only increase, so the floodgates WILL eventually be breached. The reason the feds are fighting this so hard, is again, money. They nor their masters can figure out a way to profit from medical marijuana, so they will continue to fight it, but they will eventually have to capitulate and at least decriminalize marijuana for medical usage if for no other reason than the eventual big demand for it.

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

Comments are closed-

Cannabis inspired political documents
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Androgyne on Jul 7, 2007 6:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps Sen. Nelson should read the cannabis-inspired writings of James Madison in the Federalist Papers.

Madison is reported to have said that hemp gave him insight to create a new and democratic nation.

Too, Madison's cannabis-smoking buddy Thomas Jefferson penned the first draft of the Declaration of Independence on hemp paper.

Jefferson is credited with the words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Perhaps Sen. Nelson and Veep Al Gore should've learned how to smoke cannabis. Cannabis is not a drug.

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

» Grow your own Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

Shame on the hypocrites
[Report this comment]
Posted by: pieman on Jul 7, 2007 10:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it really blows me away that those who smoked pot and did lsd back in the 60s and 70s are on the side of the pothibitionists....i have met folks who fit the mold....its weird that they fit the repugnikkkan stereotype...furthermore, i am sure that many female pothibitionists were sexually active in a big way....they act like they got new cherries....in fact, i know one woman who is into that type of trip!!! we had a very hot relationship back then!!! hey we almost got caught fucking in her parents suburban swimming pool at age 17 in suburban la...now she is a hasidic jew who would forget she was the wildest freek in the neighborhood....

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

» RE: Shame on the hypocrites Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

Legalize it
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Reader11722 on Jul 7, 2007 10:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obscene laws against marijuana, yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations:
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't.
Support Dr. Ron Paul and end this madness.
Last link (unless Stark County District Library caves to the gov't and drops the title):
America Deceived (Book)

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

Comments are closed-

If you go through the comments...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Mojoe on Jul 7, 2007 10:35 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The pro-Pot comments are rated 5 and the anti-Pot comments are rated 1. Seems peculiar.

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

Comments are closed-

donot legalise marihuana and prostitution
[Report this comment]
Posted by: richholland on Jul 8, 2007 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
since both products are legalised in holland prices went up

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

Comments are closed-

the REAL reasons drugs are illegal
[Report this comment]
Posted by: green1 on Jul 8, 2007 10:12 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the REAL reason drugs are illegal is political. First, the people supplying the illegal drugs, the people making the megabux off it are connected to the politicians. Some of them are politicians. They are wealthy and use their money to ensure drugs remain illegal. One major Player is George H.W. (POPPY) Bush. It was his idea to have Ronald Reagan declare the "War on Drugs", while he used military ships and planes to bring illegal drugs to the streets.

Second, the wealthy are aware the felony convictions of drug users and small time dealers rob these people of their right to vote. Since there are less of the wealthy, they would like for the mass of the lower class to have as small an impact as possible in elections. This is a perfect way to keep the poor from voting. Don't think for a second that wealthy people don't do drugs. They do, and they get busted, too, occasionally. But the police don't target their neighborhoods for drug busts, and when they get caught they can afford a good lawyer to plea bargain down to a misdemeanor, or if they are convicted, they pay to have their records exponged. Those who cannot afford this and are convicted of a felony lose their right to vote, and own a firearm.

Third, busting small time dealers and users contributes huge amounts of money to the court systems, lawyers, and rehabilitation centers. It boosts the economy. The illegal drug trade gives local governments a reason to hire more police, which ensures more arrests, more money coming into the court, and then to the rehab. It creates jobs.

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

Comments are closed-

hippy
[Report this comment]
Posted by: hippy on Jul 9, 2007 5:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
colmans bought and paid for. big buisness owns our politicians. big pharma dosent want you to smoke pot, they
would rather use us as test rats for thier own brand of mood altering drugs. we dont want to use somthing they cant control. after all this is only a substance that has been around since the beginning of time. put on your thinking caps folks.

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

Comments are closed-

I'd go for in-you-face
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Raybo on Jul 9, 2007 9:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about the fact that many of our youth today are taught by and inspired by wonderful teachers who just happen to also be pot smokers? When will we see that it is an obvious right of any adult to take a single seed into their home, grow it, harvest the flowers and bake them into a cookie for a relaxing, fun, and inspiring time? Why are we still so myopic in our views of this substance that certainly for adults is so innocuous, if not salutary? I am tired of our silly laws that govern the use of this substance. Please, someone, some group, organize mass smoke-ins at public parks, big parks. Then, at the clarion call of stategically places trumpeters, we can all spark one up at the same time, making it impossible to arrest even a significant percentage of those participating. Does it always have to be at events like concerts, Rainbow Gatherings, and Burning Mans? I would so like this movement to get more in-your-face.

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

Comments are closed-

Hollyweed
[Report this comment]
Posted by: A rope leash on Jul 9, 2007 2:48 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This thread is still limping along, so I thought I might add two more cents to maybe spark it up.

That '70s show is on the television right now. It's 4 in the afternoon, and the kids are home. The basic plot of the show is teenagers doing all they might to get high, drink beer, and have sex. My kids get what's going on when they spin the camera around the table in the smoky room.

This show is on twice everyday where I live. The point is, drugs are cool. Drugs have been cool since at least 1964. It's there in the movies, it's there in the music, it's there at the party.

I don't know how many recent movies I've seen that featured a potsmoking scene, as if it were nothing, or perhaps a rite of passing...with the vast majority of the actors failing to present an actual depiction of a stoned person. Come on, I've been stoned many times on far out shit, but I've never been Cheech and Chong stoned...it's an exaggeration, in my point of view.

But, how many unfortunate souls out there get trapped by the mixed signals? Back in the day, I was inspired by The Beatles. We all know what they did, and what we did, and how some got caught up in the law and how some didn't. Today, Snoop Dog is indvertantly sending them to prison with his message of cool. Willie Nelson surely has inspired many a cowhand to try the hempweed flower. Beck, well...I like Beck. I also like the smell of skunk.

Anyway, Hollywood promotes it, and Washington prosecutes it. It seems a bit by design, if you ask me...

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

Comments are closed-

LeaveMeAlone
[Report this comment]
Posted by: edtattom on Jul 9, 2007 3:21 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've read the thread of EagleMB's thoughts and I felt I have to respond. So if something causes harm it should be criminalized for the greater good. If so, when do we start putting people in jail for playing football, rock climbing or stock car racing? Each of these activities kill people every year. And just what good comes from these activities? Any at all? We can certainly do without them. Ban them. You say there are many people who may use marijuana responsibly, but their pleasures, their enjoyments must be sacrificied for the greater good, and besides, such a sacrifice is trivial. I submit that for some people their marijuana is as important to them as your alchohol (or your bible) is to you. You can't make the case that marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol, so you go on to say that just because one dangerous drug is legal doesn't mean that another dangerous drug should be also legal. Well maybe so, but why don't we, out of a sense of fairness, start putting alchohol users in prison for the next twenty years and let the dope smokers live in peace for a change, since we can have only one drug legal as a time. The essence of the drug war is as follows: You get your drug; I don't get mine.

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

Comments are closed-

As a young man, I drove drunk
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Fade on Jul 10, 2007 11:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am older now and realize how stupid it was. I have smoked pot, and no it didnt kill me but it didnt do anything beneficial for me either. Today's potsmokers aren't fighting for their rights- except to maybe download music from the college library. They are lazy apathetic burnouts who break the law on a daily basis because they can't or dont want to control themselves enough to not break the law. Fuck em. If you KNOW you'll go to jail for smoking pot and you still do it, you are a dumbass. No buzz is worth jailtime or losing your freedom. Want to legalize it? Fine. Do so. Explain your position. But don't break the law because you feel like it. If your weed is that important, move to Amsterdam. Dope deals (even weed) are responsible for kids dying to get bricks of mexican mafia weed to America potheads. It funnels money to the worst scum on the planet, who use that money for other illicit drug smuggling. Yes, Pot isnt' harmful. But its still illegal. I'm all for legalizing it- but until you do, don't break the damn law.

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

Comments are closed-

Jury Nullification
[Report this comment]
Posted by: gellero on Jul 10, 2007 6:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most of the USA in the under 50 generation have been stoners.....if you're ever on a jury, you have the right of juror nullification. Don't be a hypocrite....stand up to the man.

See you at BurningMan !!

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

Comments are closed-

Consider the origin...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: MadFlacc on Jul 11, 2007 1:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...of the anti-pot crusade. DuPont Chemical and the timber industry were threatened by hemp, which can be used to make paper much cheaper than wood and without the environmental effects of cutting down trees. So they enlisted Henry Anslinger to drum up anti-weed hysteria. They used to call it a narcotic, for fuck's sake.

The criminalization of weed is ridiculous on a number of fronts - especially considering the massive volume of alcohol and prescription drugs that move through this country - but if you take a step back from all that, you can see it for what it is: just another power grab by big corporations at the expense of those without enough money to defend themselves.

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

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

Out all the hypocrits
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Hypocrisy or enlightenment?
[Report this comment]
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: LMNOP
» 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

Comments are closed-

adults today are scared kids (on the playground of life)
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Are there any real “Legalize Pot” politicians or parties?
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Draconian laws and a phoney war on drugs save the US military money
[Report this comment]
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
» RE: What a dumb bastard Posted by: LMNOP

Comments are closed-

The most shocking news here...
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Francis
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

The most self righteous
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Who's making the money from illegal pot?
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

He probably still smokes pot and his "anti-pot" crusades are to cover his own actions
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Interesting 1/2 the story
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

"Wipe that stupid smile off your face....."
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Sorry, you cannot rate your own comment....
[Report this 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]

Comments are closed-

Gateways
[Report this comment]
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: cbrislain

Comments are closed-

somebody send one of these to Hillary
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Learn from Experience
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

legalize marijuana
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Beware of Those Who See the Light
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

pot is different now
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

Speaking of drugs, Coleman wants to push Rush Limbaugh on your kids
[Report this comment]
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]

Comments are closed-

Coleman is not all bad.
[Report this comment]
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

Comments are closed-

myths debunked...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Ghoulman on Jul 6, 2007 11:10 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... there's already a few posts insisting that 60 year old myths about pot are still true.

* Pot today is more potent, even dangerous.
- No.

* It's a "gateway drug".
- This is a political word, not a medical one. The GOP made it up.

* It's worse than cigarettes.
- Actually, weed is medically beneficial. Even smoked it burns at a lower temperature than cigarettes and have no additives while cigarettes have 160 poisons in each one. And hey, you can always use a vaporizer.

* It's addictive.
- No one sucked cock behind a 7-11 for weed.

* It's damaging to the brain.
- That's booze dumbass.

* People have died.
- 5000 years of use and still not one death. Not even a medical problem.

I could go on I suppose. But I would like to point out that even the American Medical Establishment has come out to support Cannibus as a pain reliever much more effective and healthy than the hard drugs doctors have forced upon patients for generations.

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

» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: Ghoulman
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: cbrislain
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: wisegalah
» RE: wisegalah is a liar Posted by: Ghoulman
» sources please Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: Brasilaaron
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: jroth420
» RE: myths debunked... Posted by: Mr. Heathen

Comments are closed-

with all the problems Bush has...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: eosrk on Jul 6, 2007 12:51 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...he's hitting the pot too...for his sanity.

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

Comments are closed-

We Need All Our Senses, But Don't Condemn for Miscreant Moments
[Report this comment]
Posted by: edgar_michel on Jul 6, 2007 1:33 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anything that takes us away from the path of excellence is not in our interest. Anything that momentarily alleviates the pain without solving the problem only exacerbates the peril of our condition. That substance that perniciously injures our ability to achieve our maximum potential continues century after century to be consumed to the detriment of mankind without the merits of its use ever questioned. Smoking Pot is not the detriment of which I speak, but it does serve as a model upon that of which I do speak can be considered. Though Pot does not immediately render the individual incapacitated or unable to further care for his or her self, it does dull the edge of excellence for just a moment allowing one to believe that they therefore feel better. They are not better, nor is their condition better, they just for a moment feel that they are better. There has been no solution to the root cause of their condition, for which they sought relief, and it was relief they were seeking, and so they have accomplished nothing in the interest of improving their lot. But for a moment they feel better, leading to the false impression that something has indeed improved. For the one who momentarily strolls into this momentary illusion of wellbeing, any avenue of departure is cut of by those who now condemn the mere incursion in that world as a sign of mortal weakness and signature of enfeeblement. So for a momentary stroll into the world of illusory comfort, one is forever stained with the stigma of being unable to envision real relief from the ragged edge of existence and precluded from ever contributing to the solution to the root cause of the pain and raggedness. It is sad that any people would ever condemn any of their brethren, for their momentary hopes of relief in a substance, considering just bow ragged the edge of life has become. It is utterly understandable that anyone existing today or 30 years ago would wish that something, anything would ease the pain of life, and considering the Iraq war and the utter rejection of the reality of global warming and its underlying causes, there is plenty of pain being created every second. How then can anyone be forever castigated for hoping that maybe there was an easier way than the way of personal triumph, which in the present setting looks extremely daunting? Of course the activity of smoking pot does nothing to improve any of our lives, but the entombment of all who stray here or there from the path of realizing their own excellence surely only inflames the ragged edge of existence much more than the momentary stroll into the world of illusionary ease could have ever inflamed. While I don’t believe that there is any merit in smoking marijuana, I think there is even less merit in marking for life one who does stroll along that path. If the smoking of marijuana has become so pernicious that we as a society can no longer function, then perhaps some short-term corrective action might be imaginable, something like 30 days at hard labor on something like a city farming project that improves the health of all, but I don’t think that this is the case. However for someone to impose corrective action on someone else who like the first person took that stroll and that first person never admits having taken that stroll, then rather than smoothing the ragged edge of life, that first person is in fact making the edge of life just that more ragged. Oh by the way, the substance of which I was speaking of in the first place was alcohol and all the other substances which cripple the mind.

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

» What we need are paragraphs Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

gateway drug
[Report this comment]
Posted by: cbrislain on Jul 6, 2007 1:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Oh come on. This is rhetoric straight out of DARE. A gateway to what? or do you even know? Would it be a "gateway" to other illegal drugs if it wasn't illegal? Is the illicit quality of the drug really the gateway that is being entered, and not anything fundamental to the drug itself? By far, the most negative effect of smoking marijuana is that it is a criminal act. Smoking it transforms every person who engages in this harmless activity into a criminal. What they do from there, is anybody's guess.

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

» RE: gateway drug Posted by: Joshua Holland
» RE: gateway drug Posted by: morticia
» RE: gateway drug Posted by: LeeAnnG
» RE: gateway drug Posted by: Fade
» RE: gateway drug Posted by: Brasilaaron

Comments are closed-

I'm smoking pot right now
[Report this comment]
Posted by: famouspipeliner on Jul 6, 2007 5:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What are you neo prudes going to do about it?

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

» RE: I'm smoking pot right now TOO! Posted by: Brasilaaron

Comments are closed-

The real issue here is ...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: skoog5600 on Jul 6, 2007 5:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
about Norm Coleman who is the biggest phony, hypocrit and a man that lacks any integrity. Having grown up in MN, when this man took to the political stage he was a democrat at one point, then changed signed on with the devil (Chaney & Bush) and is a republican. From that point on the face of MN politics has changed. What was once a liberal, community oriented state has become fractured and dare I say at times hateful. Wait, this sounds like most of the US these days.

No the issue is not pot here folks, there are a number of former pot smoking politicians who are for tough drug laws, the issue is integrity and accountability.

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

Comments are closed-

It's not just Coleman
[Report this comment]
Posted by: VAGreen on Jul 6, 2007 5:44 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately, the War on Drugs is the conventional wisdom of the out-of-touch Beltway crowd. It's why national supermajorities of 75% in the real world who favor allowing medical marijuana don't get anywhere.

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

Comments are closed-

Green bud? Fresh? Hello!
[Report this comment]
Posted by: A rope leash on Jul 6, 2007 6:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There's plenty of hypocrisy to go around when it comes to pot use and pot laws. Frankly, I've been smoking it for 35 years now, and I've only been busted once. I have many friends and acquaintences who are quite the same.

You see, we are addicted. We'd rather be high than straight. It's a smoking habit, like tobacco, only not so horrid on the withdrawal. When we go without, we get grumpy and depressed, have trouble sleeping and pooping, and tend to talk way too much. Trust me, it's not nearly as bad as being a drunkard, which was one of my previous careers.

I have driven literally hundreds of thousands of miles under the influence of marijuana with no major incidents. I've lived in many different cities in the USA, and have recieved many kudos and accolades in my life for work that I have done for major corporations. However, I now find myself without a job, and with little hope of landing one, due to the fact that even the lowliest position requires that I pass a chemical examination of my bodily fluids. Add this to the pile of hypocrisy and unfairness that surrounds this wonderful plant. A coke or crank user is clean inside of a week, an opiate user is the same. Pot users are dirty for months. They probably won't check for hallucinogens or alcohol, nor the myriad of prescription medications available. Any addict who stops long enough to pass the test will go right back when he shows clear.

What a joke. Hey, if you smoked cigarettes and had to quit to land an ordinary job, you would be screaming, because that's how bad tobacco addiction is. Pot smokers don't have a leg to stand on because it's against the law, and even though a majority of people think it should be decriminalized, we see no movement in that direction...indeed, we now see the corporations getting in on the enforcement by demanding to see your juice. So much for government by The People.

Hemp is a wonderful plant It's basically immoral not to use it to its full potential. Yes, I'm addicted to the flower of the plant, but I'm no monster. In fact, I'm much better for it...and a much better person than I was when I was drunk.

The drug war is a huge money wheel ridden by lawyers, judges, police officers, prison gaurds, and even the drug dealers themselves. The law "fights" drugs, and yet there never seems to be any real progress...gee I wonder why...

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

» RE: Green bud? Fresh? Hello! Posted by: A rope leash
» Testing...Testing Posted by: famouspipeliner
» RE: Testing...Testing Posted by: A rope leash
» I'm a nerd Posted by: ateo
» RE: I'm a nerd Posted by: A rope leash
» Funny and true Posted by: ateo

Comments are closed-

Just curious. To what does EagleBM refer,
[Report this comment]
Posted by: No.mad on Jul 6, 2007 6:27 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
or is it the obvious?

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

Comments are closed-

Norm Coleman and Jeff Spicoli - Separated at Birth
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Future Humans on Jul 6, 2007 6:55 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder what the Norm Coleman of 1970 would say to the Norm Coleman of 2007?
Future Humans

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

Comments are closed-

Now that I have seen that photo of him ba in the day
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Bobsays on Jul 7, 2007 11:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I definitely puffed with him. Norm, you motherfucker - how you got away with it for all those years!

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

Comments are closed-

WHAT GOES AROUND COMES AROUND
[Report this comment]
Posted by: nikolai on Jul 7, 2007 1:18 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've always disliked that phrase, almost as much as, "Pay it forward." Jezus, makes ya wanna vomit, doesn't it? I digress, however. In this case "What goes around comes around" may actually be appropriate to describe the MJ madness. The oldsters of whom most are no longer with us like Bing Crosby, for example, said, "Legalize marijuana? Sure, why not? When I was a young man nothing was thought of smoking hemp, it was considered to be like having a drink or two." But then in the late 30's "reefer madness" swept the country, and a new generation was indoctrinated with how evil, addictive and dangerous pot was, and those evil images of the " devilweed" were introduced at such a young age and so ingrained in Americans, that this "pot propaganda" resulting in "pot prohibition" was pretty damn effective. Now however, THAT generation is dying off, and the hippies of the 60's are becoming the elders, so the pendulum is swinging back the other way. Also, most young Americans now are much more sophisticated than their parents were by say, the (voting) age of 18, and KNOW that marijuana prohibition is unnecessary, and that the marijuana laws are indeed draconian and that enforcement of these bad laws is a waste of tax dollars. In time the marijuana laws will be eased, but in my opinion marijuana will never be fully legalized in the U.S. as neither the "bad guys" nor the "good guys" want it legal as it is a big underground money maker for the "bad guys" (when they don't get busted which is a chance they are more than willing to take) and too big a revenue generator for the "good guys" when they do get busted, since there are new prisons being built then filled to capacity with pot "dealers", and then there are those juicy property seizures, and of course employment for scores of cops like the DEA, ATF, etal, and local police, sheriffs, etc as well. Bottom line, if you can't figure out why something makes absolutely no sense (like the antiquated U.S. marijuana laws) follow the money trail. Marijuana is no different than anything else when it comes to the almighty dollar; legalization would cost way too much for many powerful (and semi-powerful) people on both sides of the law-enforcement fence, not to mention the fact that LESS police would then be needed (so the cops are going to fight legalization to their collective dying breath) and also the elite would lose a measure of their power and control over the typical U.S. citizen. Now, as far as medical usage, I do eventually see the day when folks will be able to obtain it legally for medical reasons, as this is already happening somewhat, and there IS a sizable demand for it which will only increase, so the floodgates WILL eventually be breached. The reason the feds are fighting this so hard, is again, money. They nor their masters can figure out a way to profit from medical marijuana, so they will continue to fight it, but they will eventually have to capitulate and at least decriminalize marijuana for medical usage if for no other reason than the eventual big demand for it.

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

Comments are closed-

Cannabis inspired political documents
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Androgyne on Jul 7, 2007 6:59 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps Sen. Nelson should read the cannabis-inspired writings of James Madison in the Federalist Papers.

Madison is reported to have said that hemp gave him insight to create a new and democratic nation.

Too, Madison's cannabis-smoking buddy Thomas Jefferson penned the first draft of the Declaration of Independence on hemp paper.

Jefferson is credited with the words: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."

Perhaps Sen. Nelson and Veep Al Gore should've learned how to smoke cannabis. Cannabis is not a drug.

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

» Grow your own Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

Shame on the hypocrites
[Report this comment]
Posted by: pieman on Jul 7, 2007 10:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
it really blows me away that those who smoked pot and did lsd back in the 60s and 70s are on the side of the pothibitionists....i have met folks who fit the mold....its weird that they fit the repugnikkkan stereotype...furthermore, i am sure that many female pothibitionists were sexually active in a big way....they act like they got new cherries....in fact, i know one woman who is into that type of trip!!! we had a very hot relationship back then!!! hey we almost got caught fucking in her parents suburban swimming pool at age 17 in suburban la...now she is a hasidic jew who would forget she was the wildest freek in the neighborhood....

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

» RE: Shame on the hypocrites Posted by: YogiBear

Comments are closed-

Legalize it
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Reader11722 on Jul 7, 2007 10:34 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obscene laws against marijuana, yet another infringement on our rights by the gov't. Add it to the ever-growing list of violations:
They violate the 1st Amendment by opening mail, caging demonstrators and banning books like "America Deceived" from Amazon.
They violate the 2nd Amendment by confiscating guns during Katrina.
They violate the 4th Amendment by conducting warrant-less wiretaps.
They violate the 5th and 6th Amendment by suspending habeas corpus.
They violate the 8th Amendment by torturing.
They violate the entire Constitution by starting 2 illegal wars based on lies and on behalf of a foriegn gov't.
Support Dr. Ron Paul and end this madness.
Last link (unless Stark County District Library caves to the gov't and drops the title):
America Deceived (Book)

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

Comments are closed-

If you go through the comments...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Mojoe on Jul 7, 2007 10:35 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The pro-Pot comments are rated 5 and the anti-Pot comments are rated 1. Seems peculiar.

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

Comments are closed-

donot legalise marihuana and prostitution
[Report this comment]
Posted by: richholland on Jul 8, 2007 9:27 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
since both products are legalised in holland prices went up

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

Comments are closed-

the REAL reasons drugs are illegal
[Report this comment]
Posted by: green1 on Jul 8, 2007 10:12 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
the REAL reason drugs are illegal is political. First, the people supplying the illegal drugs, the people making the megabux off it are connected to the politicians. Some of them are politicians. They are wealthy and use their money to ensure drugs remain illegal. One major Player is George H.W. (POPPY) Bush. It was his idea to have Ronald Reagan declare the "War on Drugs", while he used military ships and planes to bring illegal drugs to the streets.

Second, the wealthy are aware the felony convictions of drug users and small time dealers rob these people of their right to vote. Since there are less of the wealthy, they would like for the mass of the lower class to have as small an impact as possible in elections. This is a perfect way to keep the poor from voting. Don't think for a second that wealthy people don't do drugs. They do, and they get busted, too, occasionally. But the police don't target their neighborhoods for drug busts, and when they get caught they can afford a good lawyer to plea bargain down to a misdemeanor, or if they are convicted, they pay to have their records exponged. Those who cannot afford this and are convicted of a felony lose their right to vote, and own a firearm.

Third, busting small time dealers and users contributes huge amounts of money to the court systems, lawyers, and rehabilitation centers. It boosts the economy. The illegal drug trade gives local governments a reason to hire more police, which ensures more arrests, more money coming into the court, and then to the rehab. It creates jobs.

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

Comments are closed-

hippy
[Report this comment]
Posted by: hippy on Jul 9, 2007 5:13 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
colmans bought and paid for. big buisness owns our politicians. big pharma dosent want you to smoke pot, they
would rather use us as test rats for thier own brand of mood altering drugs. we dont want to use somthing they cant control. after all this is only a substance that has been around since the beginning of time. put on your thinking caps folks.

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

Comments are closed-

I'd go for in-you-face
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Raybo on Jul 9, 2007 9:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How about the fact that many of our youth today are taught by and inspired by wonderful teachers who just happen to also be pot smokers? When will we see that it is an obvious right of any adult to take a single seed into their home, grow it, harvest the flowers and bake them into a cookie for a relaxing, fun, and inspiring time? Why are we still so myopic in our views of this substance that certainly for adults is so innocuous, if not salutary? I am tired of our silly laws that govern the use of this substance. Please, someone, some group, organize mass smoke-ins at public parks, big parks. Then, at the clarion call of stategically places trumpeters, we can all spark one up at the same time, making it impossible to arrest even a significant percentage of those participating. Does it always have to be at events like concerts, Rainbow Gatherings, and Burning Mans? I would so like this movement to get more in-your-face.

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

Comments are closed-

Hollyweed
[Report this comment]
Posted by: A rope leash on Jul 9, 2007 2:48 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This thread is still limping along, so I thought I might add two more cents to maybe spark it up.

That '70s show is on the television right now. It's 4 in the afternoon, and the kids are home. The basic plot of the show is teenagers doing all they might to get high, drink beer, and have sex. My kids get what's going on when they spin the camera around the table in the smoky room.

This show is on twice everyday where I live. The point is, drugs are cool. Drugs have been cool since at least 1964. It's there in the movies, it's there in the music, it's there at the party.

I don't know how many recent movies I've seen that featured a potsmoking scene, as if it were nothing, or perhaps a rite of passing...with the vast majority of the actors failing to present an actual depiction of a stoned person. Come on, I've been stoned many times on far out shit, but I've never been Cheech and Chong stoned...it's an exaggeration, in my point of view.

But, how many unfortunate souls out there get trapped by the mixed signals? Back in the day, I was inspired by The Beatles. We all know what they did, and what we did, and how some got caught up in the law and how some didn't. Today, Snoop Dog is indvertantly sending them to prison with his message of cool. Willie Nelson surely has inspired many a cowhand to try the hempweed flower. Beck, well...I like Beck. I also like the smell of skunk.

Anyway, Hollywood promotes it, and Washington prosecutes it. It seems a bit by design, if you ask me...

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

Comments are closed-

LeaveMeAlone
[Report this comment]
Posted by: edtattom on Jul 9, 2007 3:21 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've read the thread of EagleMB's thoughts and I felt I have to respond. So if something causes harm it should be criminalized for the greater good. If so, when do we start putting people in jail for playing football, rock climbing or stock car racing? Each of these activities kill people every year. And just what good comes from these activities? Any at all? We can certainly do without them. Ban them. You say there are many people who may use marijuana responsibly, but their pleasures, their enjoyments must be sacrificied for the greater good, and besides, such a sacrifice is trivial. I submit that for some people their marijuana is as important to them as your alchohol (or your bible) is to you. You can't make the case that marijuana is more dangerous than alcohol, so you go on to say that just because one dangerous drug is legal doesn't mean that another dangerous drug should be also legal. Well maybe so, but why don't we, out of a sense of fairness, start putting alchohol users in prison for the next twenty years and let the dope smokers live in peace for a change, since we can have only one drug legal as a time. The essence of the drug war is as follows: You get your drug; I don't get mine.

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

Comments are closed-

As a young man, I drove drunk
[Report this comment]
Posted by: Fade on Jul 10, 2007 11:31 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I am older now and realize how stupid it was. I have smoked pot, and no it didnt kill me but it didnt do anything beneficial for me either. Today's potsmokers aren't fighting for their rights- except to maybe download music from the college library. They are lazy apathetic burnouts who break the law on a daily basis because they can't or dont want to control themselves enough to not break the law. Fuck em. If you KNOW you'll go to jail for smoking pot and you still do it, you are a dumbass. No buzz is worth jailtime or losing your freedom. Want to legalize it? Fine. Do so. Explain your position. But don't break the law because you feel like it. If your weed is that important, move to Amsterdam. Dope deals (even weed) are responsible for kids dying to get bricks of mexican mafia weed to America potheads. It funnels money to the worst scum on the planet, who use that money for other illicit drug smuggling. Yes, Pot isnt' harmful. But its still illegal. I'm all for legalizing it- but until you do, don't break the damn law.

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

Comments are closed-

Jury Nullification
[Report this comment]
Posted by: gellero on Jul 10, 2007 6:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most of the USA in the under 50 generation have been stoners.....if you're ever on a jury, you have the right of juror nullification. Don't be a hypocrite....stand up to the man.

See you at BurningMan !!

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

Comments are closed-

Consider the origin...
[Report this comment]
Posted by: MadFlacc on Jul 11, 2007 1:22 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...of the anti-pot crusade. DuPont Chemical and the timber industry were threatened by hemp, which can be used to make paper much cheaper than wood and without the environmental effects of cutting down trees. So they enlisted Henry Anslinger to drum up anti-weed hysteria. They used to call it a narcotic, for fuck's sake.

The criminalization of weed is ridiculous on a number of fronts - especially considering the massive volume of alcohol and prescription drugs that move through this country - but if you take a step back from all that, you can see it for what it is: just another power grab by big corporations at the expense of those without enough money to defend themselves.

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

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
The Hollywood Double Standard: Tiger gets cooked, Charlie Sheen gets another free pass
 
Is Greece the New AIG?
 
Confused About Nutrition? Eat Food!
 
Insurer Denies Life-Prolonging Treatment To Five-Year-Old Boy With Cancer
 
Budget Paranoia
 
Why Does the U.S. Assassinate Americans?
 
Jon Stewart: Why Does Sarah Palin Need a Cheat Sheet?
 
We Must Lift the Veil on US Troops in Pakistan
 
Pushing for “Zero Tolerance” on Sexual Violence in the Democratic Republic of Congo
 
Updated: Obama Calls GOP Bluff on Health-Care Reform
 
MORE 
ALL BLOGS 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
  1. Shadow Elite: How the World's New Power Brokers Are Upending Our Democracy
  2. New Poll Results Are Proof That Republicans Don't Think
  3. White "Savior-Afflicted" Christians, Black Haitian Babies: This Won't End Well
  4. Why I Had to Stop Making Hardcore Porn
  5. Sarah Palin Aims to Bust Up the Republican Party -- And the Tea Party Movement
  6. The Newest Diet Trend: What Would Jesus Eat?
  7. One Company Thinks They've Created Fast Food With a Conscience -- Are They Right?
  8. Could Your Cell Phone End Up Killing You?
  9. Half-Naked Hot Chicks and Beer: The Sexist Guyland of the Super Bowl Beer Commercial
  10. Top 10 Problems with America Killing Its Own Citizens
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
ABOUT DIGG