Officials come out against Cannabis Ignorance and Prohibition

I don't think there is much I can add to this. Is it finally happening? Are the intelligent and brave finally coming out to pu an end to this government sponsored nonsense? Check it out, it seems to be all over the media since last week.

Ex U.S. Attorney John McKay, right, speaks during a news conference as Charles Mandigo,
special agent in charge of the Seattle FBI office, looks on. (2002)

And today, yet another person in the know speaks out against Cannabis prohibition. This time, ex-Seattle FBI agent, Charlie Mandigo. I've met him several times at meetings years ago and found him to be a very nice, reasonable, and inteligent guy.

Yesteday the Seattle Times reported:

"Charlie Mandigo is not a household name, but the former Special Agent in Charge for Seattle’s FBI office is well-known with law enforcement. In his 27-year FBI career, he led investigations against Ahmed Ressam, “Millennium Bomber” caught at Port Angeles, white supremacists in North Idaho and countless drug smuggling cases."

"In a statement, Mandigo writes: There is no question the time has come when government must curtail discretionary programs. If the resources were available, continued enforcement of criminal laws for possession and use of small amounts of marijuana might be a discretionary function of government. But we have gone beyond the point where the resources are available or there is a justifiable cost-benefit to society. There must be an end to sacred cows."

"According to the group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, other former federal law enforcement officials who have come out for marijuana legalization include former Illinois U.S. Attorney Thomas Sullivan; the former head of the FBI’s Jacksonville, Fla., office, Mike Kahoe, and senior federal judge John L. Kane of Denver. If I-502 gathers enough signatures – as expected – it will go to the 2012 state Legislature, where lawmakers can pass it or kick it to the November 2012 general election."

Last week they also reported:

"The former U.S. Attorney for Seattle, Kate Pflaumer, endorsed marijuana legalization in a Seattle Times guest editorial today, adding credibility to an already high-profile initiative campaign. Pflaumer joins former U.S. Attorney John McKay in endorsing the New Approach Washington campaign, an initiative likely headed to the 2012 state Legislature that would legalize and regulate marijuana similarly to alcohol. The Seattle Times column also was signed by former King County Judge Robert Alsdorf and Anne Levinson, a former Seattle Municipal Court judge."

That same day Pflaumer published an editorial:

"Sign Initiative 502 to put marijuana legalization before state Legislature."

It begins:

"WE are, respectively, a former federal prosecutor and two former judges who have not only observed but also enforced marijuana laws at the federal, state and local levels. As we write this, our former colleagues continue to enforce these laws, as is their duty as legal professionals and public officials.

"We ask that these laws be changed. It is time for a different, more effective approach. That's why we endorse Initiative 502, which would decriminalize marijuana in our state and make a long-overdue change for the better in public policy.

"I-502 would replace the existing marijuana-prohibition approach with a public-health approach that allows adults 21 and over to purchase limited quantities of marijuana from state-licensed and state-regulated businesses. The sale of marijuana would be taxed and the new revenue — estimated in the hundreds of millions of dollars annually — would go instead to help meet important public needs."



LEAP - Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

I do wish they would stop calling it Marijuana. But anyway....

I just heard that people are suggesting that we shorten the school year and increase class sizes by two kids. I'm kind of horrified. We have been behind much of the world for years on education, this, regardless of our economic situation, is unreal. I've been saying since childhood that we need to have year round school years, no summer vacations. We already have too many vacations going, but that's okay, if ever few months the kids get a week off, cool. Two weeks? That's kind of pushing it.

Adding kids to the classroom? I don't think so, I think we need to figure out the optimal number of kids in a classroom and pass a law that, that's it. Not like the prisons where you can only have so many inmates to a cell, then triple it. Plus, every other classroom should have a teacher in training as a teacher's aide. We need to kick our kids up the ladder in education in substance, style and content. More people, not less.

And removing this nonsense about things like Cannabis, and putting that money to something that we desperately need to do, like take care of our kids, only makes sense. If we increase the brain power of our kids, there is a very good chance they won't want to be stoned all the time. Of course, they will then be smart enough very likely, to want to get stoned occassionally to relieve stress, but that's okay. It's better than taking the pills many of their parents take, and that the drug companies, Western Medicine (AMA) and our government push on us. That is, of course, as long as they are over 18, and if they buy it legally or grow it themselves.

Does anyone seriously believe this anymore?

I don't know, but maybe, just maybe it's finally time to vote this prohibition and these ignorant, punitive laws right off the books?

Occupy Wall Street, Allowing our Government to Govern us

I just don't understand. I don't understand what has happened to our country. I do not understand the people that people choose to put in charge of an entire country, I also don't understand, if we're the most "everythingwhatever" country in the history of the world, why do we have such lame ducks running for office?

Especially, the Office of the President of the United States of America? Shouldn't we have the best and brightest vying for office, available, and ready, prepared and educated for this office? Should we perhaps be raising children to run for office, to focus on making our country (and not just themselves, or their idiologies) the best country in the world?

SOMETHING IS VERY WRONG.

Someone pointed out to me that we do have a class of people who run for office and they are called Politicians. And that is the problem. But their motivations are wrong and that has been damaging our country. We don't need people running for office for their own glorification. They need to selflessly run for office to make the country the best it can be. EVEN if that goes against their best interests.

How do we end up with such fools and idiots in office, or even being supported by their parties to run for office? How did George W. Bush, EVER get into office? And get to be voted in a second term? Okay, maybe the worst terrorist act perpetrated on US soil just might have something to do with it. But how did a fool like Dan Quayle ever get to be Vice President of the United States? What's happening? Why do we have these sad things repeatedly being burdoned upon us? I have no answer. I don't get it either.

Yes, I think perhaps, being a politician is the issue here. This is a good point. Perhaps we need to stop being politicians and start being managers of the people's trust. Thomas Jefferson said the government that governs least governs best. Jon Stewart said that perhaps the government that governs the most effecively governs best.

Judge Napolitano said that government should only protect the people from fraud and force. This guy is interesting, but he's balancing on a bucket if you ask me. Still he has some good things to say.

Essentially our government and the parties that run it, are entrenched and have cancerous growths all through it that need to be restructured and trimed. But that means it will hurt those who are perpetuated by the status quo. The Politicians. The Lobbyiests.

None of this will happen by natural processes, as things are now and have been for years. So, what then?

People in the streets may be just what is needed. So cut those in the occupy movement some slack. I'm hearing a lot of comment against them lately by "The People". Our youth may be at times misdirected, or ignorant of all the things involved but they stir things up, and they are simply right at times. Still they need more focus too.

Perhaps what we need is one more tragedy, one more economic crisis. Since the people are in the streets now, if more people felt motivated to join them, that could be the catalyst to evoke the changes we need. I'm not saying we should foment anything, I'm just pointing out that one more massive change will be just enough to push the upside down pyramid finally over.

But do we really need a catalyst? History shows that people need to be either fearful or angry enough to speak their minds and shut things down. Then the Government becomes concerned (or fearful themselves enough) to evoke changes. No one wants to change the status quo until it becomes uncomfortable enough to want it changed to return to that level of comfort they once had.

The trouble is, we are there now. The other trouble is, American's are quite adaptable and have great perserverance. It's all very ADD, MTV attention span-ish. If you are miserable and it lasts too long, you adapt to the new level of discomfort, until it becomes the new level of comfort. It's Human nature really.

But sometimes you just need artificial levels of discomfort to evoke change. These are brought about by religious concerns (breaking established religious tenets), political (breaking established political... yeah, you get it), cultural (crushing Native Americans back in the old West, for instance), and so on.

So, we need even worse things to happen to us now, to affect us enough to stand up and kick some government and corporate ass, or we need to artificially lower the bar for our status quo so we feel things are even worse than they are.

So what do we (you) do? I don't have the answer. If you don't have the answer, then what do you do?

And so, you end up with people in the streets, pissed off, making noise, wanting change and not knowing what it is, but knowing it's not what has been done up to this point. When someone is ripping you off, and you don't know how, why, or how to stop it, sometimes you just need to stand up and yell loud enough, and they will stop.

Drawing attention is sometimes all it takes. Because people doing things that are wrong, especially when they know they are wrong, do not like attention being drawn to them. It evokes change all by itself because others don't like the attention and they tend not to support that which draws attention to them.

So maybe, just maybe, the Occupy Movement is on to something. Maybe we should be pushing for others to run for office. Maybe all this change will lead to the right kind of people to start taking action, paying attention, running for office, evoke changes, give us our world back.

Sometimes all it takes is yelling NO, to those abusing us; and YES to those who can help us.

Weekend Wise Words

Be Smart! Be Brilliant!

“Sex education may be a good idea in the schools, but I don't believe the kids should be given homework.”
Bill Cosby

“See, the problem is that God gives men a brain and a penis, and only enough blood to run one at a time.”
Robin Williams

“Comedy just pokes at problems, rarely confronts them squarely. Drama is like a plate of meat and potatoes, comedy is rather the dessert, a bit like meringue.”
Woody Allen

“Comedy is the art of making people laugh without making them puke.”
Steve Martin

“Comedy is simply a funny way of being serious.”
Peter Ustinov

“The duty of comedy is to correct men by amusing them.”
Moliere

“All I need to make a comedy is a park, a policeman and a pretty girl.”
Charlie Chaplin

I'm not an athiest. How can you not believe in something that doesn't exist? That's way too convoluted for me.
A. Whitney Brown

Just why is Courtney Zito crashing the SuperBowl?

Okay. So, just who IS this Courtney Zito person and just what the heck does the Super Bowl have to do with her?

And Doritos? Excuse me?

If you haven't heard about the very sweet and charming Courtney or her character, Quinn Munroe on the "Hollywood Girl" web series, well, first of all, you're missing out, and second, where have you been hiding? Have you heard about any "Web Series" shows? Hello? Are you awake yet? Look, if you need, I'll give you a few minutes....

Okay, so you've heard about the Super Bowl, right? Now how about Doritos snack foods? What do these three apparently disparate subjects have in common? Well, nothing really. Till now.

Courtney is a pretty damn attractive and talented actress, writer and producer of, as I alluded to earlier, the popular web series "Hollywood Girl". She has been in film and on TV. But really, that's not the point here.

You see, Doritos and the Super Bowl have teamed up to offer a pretty cool and fun contest: produce a SuperBowl worthy commercial and if it wins, they will air it during the SuperBowl. Not to mention, some other pretty cool prizes.

So Courtney figured, "I have to make one of these." And she did. Courtney's Doritos submission for the "Crash the SuperBowl Hollywood Edition" contest is titled, "Battle of the Sexes" (check it out here). It's Guys vs. Girls in a battle for the Doritos, and they pull out all the stops. Courtney, Robert Grant, Sean Beaty, Kelsey Scott star in it. And it's really funny. No really. It is. Honest.

In Courtney's own words:

"Hey Everyone! Now is the time we really need your help! Please create an account on the Doritos website and leave us a nice comment telling the judges why we should be in the top 5! Then once we make it to the finals, you will be able to use that login to vote daily! This will also help us reach our goal of 10,000 views by Nov. 21st! We are over 6000 already, so it's definitely do-able! Thanks again for all of your support!"

Just check it out. Okay? I think you'll want to help when you see it. Just think, you can be a part of putting a really funny commercial on the SuperBowl!

Cannabis in Washington

People sometimes misunderstand about this whole Marijuana, Cannabis, Pot, whatever issue. The legalization of Cannabis is not about getting "high", or about people who want to get "high" to get "high" without getting busted. It is not about "Medical Marijuana" which is ridiculous in several ways (people who have a medical reason should have it, if they are dying and want it and it does nothing, they should have it, if they just want it, they should have it). Alcohol has effects similar to cocaine, it numbs you just like cocaine. Cigarettes are extremely addictive. Many "legal" prescription drugs are extremely addictive and dangerous.

Dangerous drugs ARE illegal (cigarettes, alcohol, prescription drugs, etc.). Why is a weed so benign in comparison, illegal?

It is about wasting public funds, incarcerating people who are good law abiding people except for where the laws are immoral and should be illegal, taking law enforcement resources away from violent crimes and the true criminals and dangerous drug people.

From the MPP release today:

"Yesterday, Tacoma, WA voters sent a powerful message to Olympia by joining Seattle in officially declaring marijuana possession laws the city’s “lowest law enforcement priority.” Congratulations to Don Muridan and Sherry Bockwinkel, co-sponsors of Tacoma Initative No. 1, CannabisReformAct.org, who gathered the necessary signatures, and of course the voters who helped make this victory possible.

"Despite running this campaign in an off-year election, the measure passed by nearly a 2:1 margin, gathering 65% of the vote. Modeled after Seattle’s 2003 initiative, Initiative No. 1 makes adult marijuana possession offenses the lowest priority for law enforcement. Although more than 200 people were charged last year with minor marijuana possession in Tacoma, the city attorney has called the initiative unnecessary, arguing that marijuana charges are already a low priority in Tacoma. Well, now that’s official.

"Yesterday’s vote was about more than a legal technicality. The broad support enjoyed by Initiative No. 1 demonstrates the overarching sentiment expressed by the voters: marijuana prohibition has failed. Police should stop wasting time arresting people for using a substance safer than alcohol and instead spend that time protecting our community from violent criminals and other real threats to public safety. Let’s hope Tacoma-area elected officials were listening."

Oh and that being said, one more blurb from the MPP:

"During his run for the presidency, Obama instilled hope in medical marijuana supporters by pledging to respect state laws on the matter. Over the past eight months he has become the worst president in U.S. history regarding medical marijuana."

I'm kind of sad about that because I voted for President Obama and had high hopes. I would like to think he's done better than Bush. I just wish he had done a little bit more on some important issues he thinks are wasted effort. I don't think we can pick and choose so much. Yes, he should use his political capital on Healthcare, and peace efforts, our econony and so on. But that doesn't mean you get to just let some others slide that are affecting innocent people. But the president people will remember. Make some social changes that really can make a difference. Kill the "War on Drugs" along with the War on people.

And to the rest of us, Best of Luck!

One nation, under God

How fair, is this painting to all the non Christians in America who make up this country based upon Freedom, and the right to pursue your happiness, regardless of Race, Creed, or Color?

I recently signed the petition online to remove "Under God" from the pledge of Allegiance. The only way to be fair and decent, is simply to remove the references to God, or any one group's God, from the Governing authorities.

So I signed the petition to return to the words this country had used since its founding by the founding Fathers. If it was good enough for them, those brave individuals who fought and died for this country to be created, who are we, far lesser beings to be cowardly enough to change that to our lesser understanding of all the great concerns they bore for us?

So, I said my peace by signing. And the Obama Administration retorted theirs.

Here is the response I received via email. I thought it was a good and considered response. We agree to disagree....

Religion in the Public Square   

By Joshua DuBois, Executive Director of the Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships


Thank you for signing the petition “Edit the Pledge of Allegiance to remove the phrase ‘Under God.’” We appreciate your participation in the We the People platform on WhiteHouse.gov.


The separation of church and state outlined in the First Amendment to the United States Constitution is an important founding principle of our nation. Our nation’s Bill of Rights guarantees not only that the government cannot establish an official religion, but also guarantees citizens’ rights to practice the religion of their choosing or no religion at all.


Throughout our history, people of all faiths – as well as secular Americans – have played an important role in public life. And a robust dialogue about the role of religion in public life is an important part of our public discourse.

While the President strongly supports every American’s right to religious freedom and the separation of church and state, that does not mean there’s no role for religion in the public square.


When he was a Senator from Illinois, President Obama gave a keynote address at the Call to Renewal conference where he spoke about the important role religion plays in politics and in public life.  

A sense of proportion should also guide those who police the boundaries between church and state. Not every mention of God in public is a breach to the wall of separation - context matters.

That’s why President Obama supports the use of the words “under God” in our Pledge of Allegiance and “In God we Trust” on our currency. These phrases represent the important role religion plays in American public life, while we continue to recognize and protect the rights of secular Americans. As the President said in his inaugural address, “We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus, and non-believers.” We’re proud of that heritage, and the strength it brings to our great country.


Related Links:

• Inaugural Address 

Check out this response on We the People.

The trouble is, the place for religion on the public square, is within each individual and not on a platform, or a general open agenda, and so there is therefore, no place for religion on the public square.

How is that a complicated thing to understand? Once you put religion out on the public square in politics and government, it is the beginning of the end, and the road to fascism. We have seen this time and again and we have seen it in modern times by ancient societies in the Middle East.

We are at a dangerous time, when these things are out and about and alive world wide, we cannot allow them to seep into our culture on a national, governmental level. This is something the conservatives, the Republicans, and those running for national office have failed to see. It leads to blindness, it leads to foolishness like the world was created 4,000 years ago. It leads to ignorance. And that isn't even getting into the Seriousness of it.

Religion should be a personal thing. Not something that is legislated. Not something to be in the government. Because it is too easy to live again through those McCarthy "communism" years, only on the side of God and Religion as the ruling bodies. Should we be afraid? I don't think there is any doubt about it.

Should religion be wiped out? No. Why? Because it will eventually die out on it's own. We just don't need it to go the route again of another repression, or inquistion, or bullying, or oppression.

We just need to live and let live, support our country for what it was founded for. Yes, you can have your own religion. No, you cannot push it on others.

Occupy What?

I find this a bit offensive.

Why? Because it presupposes a few things. Like the person/group who wrote that, knew better before Obama got elected. Like, the other viable candidate would have done better, not worse. Like Obama didn't indeed do a lot of good, simply by being elected; I submit that he could even do worse than he has and still have served his purpose by having been elected. 

Even giving the author of the photo consideration that they are correct, and I assume it is a Republican (and no, I'm not a Democrat), to look at the vast wasteland that is the Republican party, and its candidates (Herman Cain? Really?), had it gone the other way, the supporters of Obama would easily have been able to say the same thing right back at them about their candidate. 

Saying "YOU idiots elected" not only passes on responsibility for the lack of superior candidates on the Republican side, it completely avoids who badly we needed that shot in the arm that Obama winning gave the America spirit and not just on the side of African Americans. Even whites were proud to live in a country where a Black man can achieve the highest office in the world. Yes, reverse discrimination of a sort, but a positive kind of sorts.

But political rhetoric like in this photo shows more the type of intellect involved not only in the Republican party, but in US politics in general. It's a sad state of affairs that is only pointing out the banality of the other side when they poorly try to cut down their opponents in useless negative comments.

What really is the problem? Obama? No.

I agree and I said when he was elected, people are going to be disappointed in him. Not because of his personality, history or orientation. But because people had put him on a pedestal. One that no one could maintain. I'm feeling let down by him myself.

Obama's attitude that he will not expend political capital to end the billions of dollars involved int he drug war, in Cannabis persecution, in ruining thousands of American citizens lives through repression and incarceration, is simply disillusioning in and of itself. Yes, I agree with him that we need the healthcare situation fixed, the economic situation and others. But he was hired not to do one thing. He was hired to do the undo-able. To fix, many things. To run the bad in government down and crush it.

When do we get THAT president?

The President has an army of people under him to do his bidding. I'm pretty sure he can make some vast changes to fix, or lead to fixing this situation. In fact, it may be one of the most easily rectified situations in his arsenal. Yet, obviously, he is choosing not to "bother" with it. I think about the guy sitting in prison who shouldn't be there at all, his family, wife, children, suffering, all do to immoral laws. It is easy for Government officials to lean on the Supreme court ruling that abusing America citizens is "okay". But that still doesn't make it right.

Sometimes, we just have to do what is right, even if people don't like us for it.

I have to wonder, if Obama hit the floor running, butt heads with all the jackals in Washington, if he showed the American people he was trying, he was relentless, he was going to evoke massive change, if that shock would ripple through the government and things just might have gotten done.

We need a house cleaning. Occupy Wall Street. Occupy your town. Occupy those lazy officials we hired to fix things, who are simply having their daily afternoon drinks, relaxing, while people are starving, sitting in prison for no real reason, watching their American Dream dissolve right before their eyes, and that of their children's future evaporate on a daily basis.

We need to educate our children, or we are lost. We don't need to burden them with bills to get that education for the rest of their lives as some are now. We don't have the money, you say? Well, how'd we get there? Where IS that money, because you know what? It's out there, somewhere. Someone has it. And we need to take it back.

Peacefully. But we need to stand in their face, as we are now, and say, do it. We are the boss pal, not you, not your gang of Washington Hooligans, corporate whores, lobbiest prostitutes, ignorant superstitious religious addicts, diseducated urban hicks and just basic racists and assholes.

So, now that we've been paying you guys for decades, how about doing what we pay you for. Make things functional. Protect the common interest. Protect and propagate the public trust. And stop worrying about yourself only.