In 1985, a reporter for the New York Times asked President Ronald Reagan how he viewed the cold war.
“We win, they lose” was Reagan’s reply.
President Reagan knew Communism was a doomed system because a centrally planned economy can never hope to properly respect and accomodate the individual needs of its participants.
Unfortunately, for the last 60 years, the federal government has waged a war on drugs that fails to recognize an innate desire of adults to alter their consciousness and treat certain illnesses with a minimally harmful substances such as cannabis. The drug war, will ultimately collapse because of this fundamental flaw. In the mean time, it undermines the people’s confidence in the government that wages this war, because in essence, it is a war on those same people.
I will wear black on July 4th to mourn what has become of my country.
Join me if you care to.
Join me if you care, too.
So, from the NY Times on 12/11/12:
In 2012, HSBC faced state and federal investigations into money laundering, as prosecutors concluded that the bank had transferred billions of dollars for nations like Iran and enabled Mexican drug cartels to move money illegally through its American subsidiaries. But in December, authorities decided not to seek an indictment over concerns that criminal charges could jeopardize one of the world’s largest banks and ultimately destabilize the global financial system.
Max Keiser sums it up in the most recent episode, and gets into the whole drug debate:
What does this do to the risk free rate? I don’t see how it can be good? So the rule of law goes completely out the window. People lose faith in the markets, the ‘risk free rate’ goes up, discount rate goes up, and equity prices go down. Easy Peasy.
So basically stock prices go down because no one trusts the markets. But if we reduce cartel income through legalization of weed, markets implode because the banks don’t have income from price-inflated weed to fill their capital requirements.
Hey, I wonder what John Corzine is up to now?
In his 1984 campaign, Ronald Reagan used the following campaign commercial to remind Americans that certain things were improving in America. Employment levels were increasing and Interest rates were falling, allowing more American’s to purchase their homes and start on their path to the American dream of home ownership.
On November 6, 2012, activists (mainly progressive activists such as Mason Tvert at Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol and Rick Steves, among others, at New Approach Washington to give credit where it is due) in two states, Colorado and Washington, used the ballot initiative process to legalize marijuana use for non-medical reasons. Although the sun had set as the results came in, people in the marijuana movement knew that the positive results meant that the Next morning in America was at hand. Adult marijuana consumers in those two states would no longer lose their liberty through incarceration or the loss of their constitutional rights. Families will no longer be broken up if a parent posses cannabis. Privacy will no longer be violated by local law enforcement searching for small amounts of weed.
The feds will likely push back in some form, as marijuana remains on schedule I of the controlled substances act, but everyone, liberal and conservative, in the cannabis movement hopes, that it is finally Morning in America for cannabis users too.
Tweet your thoughts with #nextmorningAmerica
Congratulations to Colorado, Washington state, and to all the activists that helped make non-medicinal use of marijuana happen. Its a big step for personal liberty and for marijuana movement.
While i am very happy for yesterdays victory, i am fearful for what lies ahead.
I remember when i started looking into the marijuana movement. I was looking for a new thing to learn about. I had never consumed cannabis in any form, but had friends that did, so i was curious to learn what the controversy was all about. I found Russ Belville’s podcast at NORML, now independently produced, which was very helpful (in a lefty kind of way:-) ) in helping me understand the issues at hand. Mr Belville explained that a legalization victory at the state level was significant because even though it might remain illegal at the federal level, the feds wouldnt have the manpower to pursue individual users. Sounded logical to me.
But times are changing and I fear what I see on the horizon.
Perhaps you’ve seenit too. Its moving slow, but its coming, and i cant quite tell who is driving the bus. There will be push back against yesterdays victories from all levels. i don’t know the legal processes that will be applied, I’m not a lawyer, but surely there will be pushback against the new law. Thats not my concern though. Assuming legalization stays in place at the state level, marijuana remains illegal at the federal level. So what? Will the feds come knocking on all of our doors? Never happen, you say? Well thats where things are changing.
There are two trends that i see that are changing the law enforcement dynamic: TSA enforcement creep and financial distress at the municipal level.
I cant say that i track it carefully, but have you noticed the increased presence of the TSA recently? Car checkpoints last halloween in Tennessee. Security at campaign rallies for both candidates during this years campaign season. Security checkpoints for rail passengers. Why not buses? Will cars be next? At that point you’ll have a significant federal law enforcement presence at the local level. They don’t care about your local laws, they are there to enforce federal regulations.
So what about financially stressed municipalities? Well, some places where things are really bad financially because their property tax base has been gutted, they are disbanding their police departments. Municipalities cant afford to pay the pension benefits, so they disband the locl police departments, and turn policing over to the county sheriffs office who does it at a lower price. Some of the officers will get rehired by the county. Where do the rest go? I suspect the TSA will be happy to take up the slack to help ensure that roads are safe.
And there you go, Federal law enforcement at the local level. You did notice the bulk purchase of hollow point bullets by every federal agency and their mom this summer, right? They will be happy to let the few remaining local cops enforce state law, but weed remains Schedule 1 at the federal level, so your grass is theirs.
It may not happen in President Obama’s next four years, but its probably being planned now. Watch the TSA, watch the local drones, watch municipal credit ratings. The Republican elected next time will probably be the one to implement it (obvious speculation), and the left will rail against her for doing it, at least that is what i suspect is coming. So congrats to Colorado and Washington, on a hard fought victory, enjoy it while it lasts.
A bit of an off-topic post here, but its what I was thinking this morning in New York City. Its not at all cannabis related, but the conservatives I know do mainly want to help their neighbors when times get critical, especially when the government isn’t compelling them to do so.
I was impacted very little from a practical standpoint by Hurricane Sandy. Sure my office was shut down for about a week, but my lights never went off, my basement…what basement, my apartment is dry, but most importantly my kitchen and food source is fine. This is probably the case for most residents of New York City. Another portion was not as lucky, however.
So what I would propose is a voluntary system where that could connect those impacted relatively less by the storm to be able to cook something for those who were affected.
It would harness the power of kitchens of those people like me who are still equipped to help those who are not. The system would be coordinated online and would require some sort of human governing to coordinate logistics.
It would go something like this.
- Participants sign up online prior to an emergency, either for food preparation or bulk food transportation truck owners.
- Participants commit to cooking a specific meal that can feed multiple people (1 whole lasagna, 1 whole chicken, 1 gallon stew, 2.5 gallons of water etc), and maintain the necessary ingredients for that meal in their homes at all times
- In the event of an emergency, emails would be sent out to all participants, reminding them to check their participation requirements (ingredients, fuel, or truck, etc) and then after the emergency, asking them to log in an assess their ability to participate. Those who are in need, probably can’t cook and either wouldn’t respond, or would indicate a need. Those who aren’t in need and can cook would indicate as such.
- Meals would be sourced from neighborhood collection points at predetermined times and then transported to neighborhoods in need.
- Meals wouldn’t be prepared in certified commercial kitchens.
- Transportation bottlenecks would hamper efforts.
- Someone might try to smuggle in a 20 oz. soda.
Anyway, its just an idea, but its something that would have made it easier for me to participate in helping in this emergency for those in the Rockaways, Brooklyn, Staten Island, and even downtown Manhattan.
Just found an episode of Firing Line with William F Buckley on Amazon Prime’s instant streaming video service.
I always find it fun to listen to Buckley. He’s sort of like Terrence McKenna in that he’s got a very distinct style of speech. Obviously very little of the subject matter overlaps, although listening to a lot of the McKenna material at the Psychedelic Salon I’ve always found McKenna to have more conservative tendencies than many of the other psychedelic luminaries. If you want to share talks about psychedelics with a conservative, McKenna can be tolerated. Whatever you do, don’t start with Timothy Leary.
Anyway, just digging into this episode of Firing Line. Its sort of amazing how far we haven’t come. The arguments are still the same, although honestly the professor on the right (Professor John Greenway) didn’t seem to have much in the way of arguments. He didn’t have an issue with heroin, but somehow weed was the devil’s cabbage. oy vey.
It was a pleasure to hear little or no bickering as is so prevalent in today’s televised discussions, and Buckley is always a pleasure to listen to.
I was disappointed that there wasn’t much discussion on the marijuana from a conservative point of view. Really it was a discussion of legalization/decriminalization and not so much about the conservative principles as they apply to Marijuana.
You can see the first five minutes or so here:
Here is my first t-shirt design. I am making a twist on Willi Schlamm’s phrase that William F Buckley used to quote, “The trouble with Communism is Communism. The Trouble with Capitalism is Capitalists. ” Jonah Goldberg at NRO seems to be taking over using that quote now. Anyway, I’m including photos of the shirt from the online printing site, and the text of the intended tag.
Intended Tag text:
William F. Buckley, founder of National Review and the modern conservative movement, was fond of quoting Austrian intellectual and former socialist Willi Schlamm who said:
“The trouble with Communism is Communism.
The trouble with Capitalism is Capitalists.”
Capitalism is a tremendously efficient way to allocate resources in an economy. We all know, however, that sometimes capitalists behave badly with respect to their shareholders, customers, and overall society. At c4c, we believe increasing the level of cannabis in the their diet may go a long way in helping mellow out the restless capitalists and ease their behavior problems.
What do you think? Tweet your comments, photos of you wearing the shirt, and reactions to the shirt with the hash tag #notenoughweed
So I was walking down my street recently and I saw this guy wearing this t-shirt.
Its more accurate to say I saw this t-shirt with William F. Buckley on it, and stopped the guy wearing it. Buckley is a fairly unique looking person, so he was easy to recognize and I wanted to see what it said. How about that, a weed quote.
So here it is.
Anyway the text is as follows:
“It is outrageous to live in a society whose laws tolerate sending young people to life in prison because they grew or distributed a dozen ounces of marijuana.”
I did a bit of searching online and found that it came from Buckley’s testimony to the New York Bar Association on “the drug question”.
National Review, founded by William F. Buckley, is basically in favor of the removal of restrictions on the use Cannabis, at least at the federal level.
Their most recent statement to this effect was in the summer of 2011, commenting on the Ron Paul and Barney Frank legislation(text of the bill here), summarized nicely in this paragraph:
“While we would support the total demise of federal marijuana laws, this bill simply constrains the federal government to its proper role. The Constitution allows the federal government to restrict interstate commerce, and the federal laws forbidding the interstate transfer of marijuana would remain in effect. The feds would also still intercept drug shipments from other countries. “
In the end, I think this is basically as it should be. End federal prohibition, let states regulate it, as they already regulate alcohol, and give people a choice in how they want to live their lives.