The following is the most ignorant statement I have ever read from a member of Congress. Here is the entire quote:
You have to have leadership from Washington. You can’t have the President of the United States of America talking about marijuana … you are sending a message to young people that there is no danger in this process. It is false that marijuana use doesn’t lead people to more drug use. It is already causing a disturbance in the states that have made it legal.
It was the prevention movement that really was so positive, and it led to this decline. The creating of knowledge that this drug is dangerous, it cannot be played with, it is not funny, it’s not something to laugh about, and trying to send that message with clarity, that good people don’t smoke marijuana.
Lady Gaga says she’s addicted to [marijuana] and it is not harmless.
-Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL)
Now here's me tearing it a new one:
You have to have leadership from Washington. You can’t have the President of the United States of America talking about marijuana … you are sending a message to young people that there is no danger in this process.
True leadership comes from We The People. We grant certain powers upon our elected representatives through elections. Those in Congress are our servants. The People do want to discuss marijuana reform. The recent elections have proven that. The reaction of the People toward the Drug Enforcement Agency when they raided lawful marijuana dispensaries was one of disdain and rightfully so.
It is false that marijuana use doesn’t lead people to more drug use. It is already causing a disturbance in the states that have made it legal.
What is Sessions asking? Does a little use of marijuana lead to a big use in marijuana or does marijuana lead to harder drugs such as crystal meth,heroin and cocaine? States that have medical marijuana report the decline in the use (and abuse) of opioid drugs because of it. DUI's (DWI's) declined while revenue skyrocketed. It got so bad that the State of Colorado had to give the excess money back to the taxpayers as per Colorado law. Oh the horror.
It was the prevention movement that really was so positive, and it led to this decline.
You mean as in those early dawn drug raids? The kind that tore a new asshole in the 4th Amendment and ruined a lot of people's day? Those ones? You know the kind that should have never existed the United States Of America,the land of the free,in the first place? Yeah,those. Amazing we were wagging our fingers at the Russians while we murdered our own Constitution. It lead to a slight decline in supply but not demand.
The creating of knowledge that this drug is dangerous, it cannot be played with, it is not funny, it’s not something to laugh about, and trying to send that message with clarity, that good people don’t smoke marijuana.
Your hysteria Senator Sessions is quite comical. Marijuana is the one of the safest substances on earth. It has no death rate. The only problem with marijuana are legal ones and you are someone in the way of reform. A reform that is long overdue. That message is quite clear as well. Good people do smoke marijuana.
Lady Gaga says she’s addicted to [marijuana] and it is not harmless.
Nice try. Lady Gaga's problem is not America's problem.
Sunday, November 27, 2016
Friday, November 25, 2016
Joining with Drug Policy Alliance in opposing Jeff Sessions' nomination
We at Among Other Things are joining in with Drug Policy Alliance in opposing the nomination of Senator Jeff Sessions as United States Attorney General. We fear Sessions will clamp down on marijuana dispensaries in states that have approved marijuana for medical and/or recreational use. If approved by the Senate Sessions will have the authority and ability to undo years of progress in a very short time with the DEA backing him up. If the dispensaries are closed down patients are going to be forced to buy from the black market. Opening them up to arrest and incarceration for marijuana that may be adulterated. With their money going to support a criminal organization. Closing down the dispensaries makes criminals out of otherwise law abiding people. Prohibition failed. It's time to move on to legalization.
Protect Net Neutrality
From Fight For The Future:
BREAKING: The Washington Post is reporting that the Trump transition team is preparing to “dismantle Net Neutrality.” Will you chip in to help save Net Neutrality?
No matter what you think about the election, one thing is clear: Net Neutrality is in the cross hairs.
Donald Trump has called Net Neutrality an "attack on the internet" and a "top down power grab," even though neither of those things is true.[1] Many members of Congress are already making plans to gut the rules we worked so hard to win.
And now Trump has has put Jeffrey Eisenach, an anti-Net Neutrality crusader funded by Verizon, AT&T, and Clear Channel, in charge of the FCC transition.
That's why The Washington Post is reporting that Trump is on the verge of "all but erasing” Net Neutrality.[2]
But this isn't the first time telecommunications lobbyists thought Net Neutrality was dead--and every time the public backlash has been enormous. Now we need to fight again.
Will you chip in to help save Net Neutrality?
The FCC's Net Neutrality rule is the only thing stopping Comcast, AT&T, and Time Warner from blocking, throttling, and censoring the Internet either for political reasons or for profit.
Trump will definitely have the power to go after Net Neutrality if he wants to. He'll soon pick a new FCC chairman and shortly after will get to replace the swing vote on Net Neutrality at the FCC.
That's why one top industry analyst this week said that under Trump, "Net neutrality has a big target on its back."[3] And Breitbart News, the alt-right news website run by Trump strategic advisor Steve Bannon said last week that "Net Neutrality is dead."[4]
But we heard the same predictions of doom for Net Neutrality when George W. Bush and Barack Obama were in office too. Every time, we used the collective power of the internet to defend freedom of expression and openness online. And we still haven’t been beaten.
When Barack Obama proposed bad policies on Net Neutrality, we stood up to him, and won. Now we'll do the same with with the new president. And all the evidence so far says that under President Trump, Net Neutrality is in deep, deep trouble.
But we've fought too long and too hard to win Net Neutrality to let it all get erased now. Will you chip in to help save it?
Yes, I'll chip in to help save Net Neutrality.
[1] Twitter
[2] The Washington Post
[3] The Denver Post
[4] Breitbart News
BREAKING: The Washington Post is reporting that the Trump transition team is preparing to “dismantle Net Neutrality.” Will you chip in to help save Net Neutrality?
No matter what you think about the election, one thing is clear: Net Neutrality is in the cross hairs.
Donald Trump has called Net Neutrality an "attack on the internet" and a "top down power grab," even though neither of those things is true.[1] Many members of Congress are already making plans to gut the rules we worked so hard to win.
And now Trump has has put Jeffrey Eisenach, an anti-Net Neutrality crusader funded by Verizon, AT&T, and Clear Channel, in charge of the FCC transition.
That's why The Washington Post is reporting that Trump is on the verge of "all but erasing” Net Neutrality.[2]
But this isn't the first time telecommunications lobbyists thought Net Neutrality was dead--and every time the public backlash has been enormous. Now we need to fight again.
Will you chip in to help save Net Neutrality?
The FCC's Net Neutrality rule is the only thing stopping Comcast, AT&T, and Time Warner from blocking, throttling, and censoring the Internet either for political reasons or for profit.
Trump will definitely have the power to go after Net Neutrality if he wants to. He'll soon pick a new FCC chairman and shortly after will get to replace the swing vote on Net Neutrality at the FCC.
That's why one top industry analyst this week said that under Trump, "Net neutrality has a big target on its back."[3] And Breitbart News, the alt-right news website run by Trump strategic advisor Steve Bannon said last week that "Net Neutrality is dead."[4]
But we heard the same predictions of doom for Net Neutrality when George W. Bush and Barack Obama were in office too. Every time, we used the collective power of the internet to defend freedom of expression and openness online. And we still haven’t been beaten.
When Barack Obama proposed bad policies on Net Neutrality, we stood up to him, and won. Now we'll do the same with with the new president. And all the evidence so far says that under President Trump, Net Neutrality is in deep, deep trouble.
But we've fought too long and too hard to win Net Neutrality to let it all get erased now. Will you chip in to help save it?
Yes, I'll chip in to help save Net Neutrality.
[1] Twitter
[2] The Washington Post
[3] The Denver Post
[4] Breitbart News
Tuesday, November 22, 2016
Sorry Rush
On today's Rush Limbaugh show Rush brought up a few people considered for Trump's cabinet that the leftists objected to. Amongst them was Senator Jeff Sessions. Rush pointed out that their fears about these cabinet members was unfounded. Usually the left's fears are unfounded. This time however the left is correct on this one. Recreational and medical marijuana have been approved by several states. If Jeff Sessions becomes Attorney General those rights and laws that have been severely fought for may be taken away from us by systematic raids by the DEA with the blessing of Sessions himself. We can't take that risk. We have to oppose the nomination of Jeff Sessions for Attorney General. The best way we can do that is to contact our Congressional Representative along with our Senators. Let's tell Donald Trump himself here and here.
Monday, November 21, 2016
Pussies on campus
Many undergraduates, their fawn-like eyes wide with astonishment, are wondering: Why didn’t the dean of students prevent the election from disrupting the serenity to which my school has taught me that I am entitled?
Campuses create “safe spaces” where students can shelter from discombobulating thoughts and receive spiritual balm for the trauma of microaggressions. Yet the presidential election came without trigger warnings?
The morning after the election, normal people rose — some elated, some despondent — and went off to actual work. But at Yale, that incubator of late-adolescent infants, a professor responded to “heartfelt notes” from students “in shock” by making that day’s exam optional.
Academia should consider how it contributed to, and reflects Americans’ judgments pertinent to, Donald Trump’s election. The compound of childishness and condescension radiating from campuses is a constant reminder to normal Americans of the decay of protected classes — in this case, tenured faculty and cosseted students.
As “bias-response teams” fanned out across campuses, an incident report was filed about a University of Northern Colorado student who wrote “free speech matters” on one of 680 “#languagematters” posters that cautioned against politically incorrect speech. Catholic DePaul University denounced as “bigotry” a poster proclaiming “Unborn Lives Matter.”
Bowdoin College provided counseling to students traumatized by the cultural appropriation committed by a sombrero-and-tequila party. Oberlin College students said they were suffering breakdowns because schoolwork was interfering with their political activism.
Cal State University, Los Angeles, established “healing” spaces for students to cope with the pain caused by a political speech delivered three months earlier. Indiana University experienced social-media panic because a priest in a white robe, with a rope-like belt and rosary beads, was identified as someone “in a KKK outfit holding a whip.”
A doctoral dissertation at the University of California, Santa Barbara, uses “feminist methodologies” to understand how Girl Scout cookie sales “reproduce hegemonic gender roles.” The journal GeoHumanities explores how pumpkins reveal “racial and class coding of rural versus urban places.” Another journal’s article analyzes “the relationships among gender, science and glaciers.” A Vassar lecture “theorizes oscillating relations between disciplinary, pre-emptive and increasingly prehensive forms of power that shape human and non-human materialities in Palestine.”
An American Council of Trustees and Alumni study — “No US History? How College History Departments Leave the United States out of the Major,” based on requirements and course offerings at 75 leading colleges and universities — found that “the overwhelming majority of America’s most prestigious institutions do not require even the students who major in history to take a single course on United States history or government.”
At some schools that require history majors to take at least one US history course, the requirement can be fulfilled with courses like “Mad Men and Mad Women” (Middlebury College), “Hip-Hop, Politics and Youth Culture in America” (University of Connecticut) and “Jews in American Entertainment” (University of Texas). Constitutional history is an afterthought.
Small wonder, then, that a recent ACTA-commissioned survey found that less than half of college graduates knew that George Washington was the commanding general at Yorktown; that nearly half didn’t know that Theodore Roosevelt was important to the construction of the Panama Canal; that more than one-third couldn’t place the Civil War in a correct 20-year span or identify Franklin Roosevelt as the architect of the New Deal; that 58 percent didn’t know that the Battle of the Bulge occurred in World War II; and that nearly half didn’t know the lengths of the terms of US senators and representatives.
Institutions of supposedly higher education are awash with hysteria, authoritarianism, obscurantism, philistinism and charlatanry. Which must have something to do with the tone and substance of the presidential election, which took the nation’s temperature.
Source
Could you get through this without laughing? I couldn't. Not at George Will,not this time but at the nation's university and college campuses. Hey kids,you know who your safe space will not protect you from? ISIS that's who.
Campuses create “safe spaces” where students can shelter from discombobulating thoughts and receive spiritual balm for the trauma of microaggressions. Yet the presidential election came without trigger warnings?
The morning after the election, normal people rose — some elated, some despondent — and went off to actual work. But at Yale, that incubator of late-adolescent infants, a professor responded to “heartfelt notes” from students “in shock” by making that day’s exam optional.
Academia should consider how it contributed to, and reflects Americans’ judgments pertinent to, Donald Trump’s election. The compound of childishness and condescension radiating from campuses is a constant reminder to normal Americans of the decay of protected classes — in this case, tenured faculty and cosseted students.
As “bias-response teams” fanned out across campuses, an incident report was filed about a University of Northern Colorado student who wrote “free speech matters” on one of 680 “#languagematters” posters that cautioned against politically incorrect speech. Catholic DePaul University denounced as “bigotry” a poster proclaiming “Unborn Lives Matter.”
Bowdoin College provided counseling to students traumatized by the cultural appropriation committed by a sombrero-and-tequila party. Oberlin College students said they were suffering breakdowns because schoolwork was interfering with their political activism.
Cal State University, Los Angeles, established “healing” spaces for students to cope with the pain caused by a political speech delivered three months earlier. Indiana University experienced social-media panic because a priest in a white robe, with a rope-like belt and rosary beads, was identified as someone “in a KKK outfit holding a whip.”
A doctoral dissertation at the University of California, Santa Barbara, uses “feminist methodologies” to understand how Girl Scout cookie sales “reproduce hegemonic gender roles.” The journal GeoHumanities explores how pumpkins reveal “racial and class coding of rural versus urban places.” Another journal’s article analyzes “the relationships among gender, science and glaciers.” A Vassar lecture “theorizes oscillating relations between disciplinary, pre-emptive and increasingly prehensive forms of power that shape human and non-human materialities in Palestine.”
An American Council of Trustees and Alumni study — “No US History? How College History Departments Leave the United States out of the Major,” based on requirements and course offerings at 75 leading colleges and universities — found that “the overwhelming majority of America’s most prestigious institutions do not require even the students who major in history to take a single course on United States history or government.”
At some schools that require history majors to take at least one US history course, the requirement can be fulfilled with courses like “Mad Men and Mad Women” (Middlebury College), “Hip-Hop, Politics and Youth Culture in America” (University of Connecticut) and “Jews in American Entertainment” (University of Texas). Constitutional history is an afterthought.
Small wonder, then, that a recent ACTA-commissioned survey found that less than half of college graduates knew that George Washington was the commanding general at Yorktown; that nearly half didn’t know that Theodore Roosevelt was important to the construction of the Panama Canal; that more than one-third couldn’t place the Civil War in a correct 20-year span or identify Franklin Roosevelt as the architect of the New Deal; that 58 percent didn’t know that the Battle of the Bulge occurred in World War II; and that nearly half didn’t know the lengths of the terms of US senators and representatives.
Institutions of supposedly higher education are awash with hysteria, authoritarianism, obscurantism, philistinism and charlatanry. Which must have something to do with the tone and substance of the presidential election, which took the nation’s temperature.
Source
Could you get through this without laughing? I couldn't. Not at George Will,not this time but at the nation's university and college campuses. Hey kids,you know who your safe space will not protect you from? ISIS that's who.
Sunday, November 20, 2016
Congressional drug prohibitionist arrested for possession of cocaine
WASHINGTON — In September, Rep. Trey Radel voted for Republican legislation that would allow states to make food stamp recipients pee in cups to prove they’re not on drugs. In October, police busted the Florida Republican on a charge of cocaine possession.
“It’s really interesting it came on the heels of Republicans voting on everyone who had access to food stamps get drug tested,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told BuzzFeed Tuesday. “It’s like, what?”
The House over the summer approved an amendment by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) that would let states drug test people on food stamps. The amendment passed by voice vote, meaning members’ individual yeas and nays were not recorded. Radel later voted in favor of a broader food stamps bill that included Hudson’s measure.
In support of his drug testing legislation, Hudson cited the many state legislatures around the country that had considered similar requirements for other means-tested programs in recent years.
“This is a clear and obvious problem in our communities as nearly 30 states have introduced legislation to drug test for welfare programs,” Hudson said. “We have a moral obligation to equip the states with the tools they need to discourage the use of illegal drugs.”
Most of the state legislation was authored by Republicans. Oftentimes, state Democrats responded by suggesting lawmakers should be subject to tests as well. If the government’s going to make sure recipients of taxpayer-funded benefits are clean, the argument went, then why not also make sure the recipients of taxpayer salaries are clean, too?
In June, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) made that very suggestion when he questioned why recipients of crop insurance and other government benefits weren’t also targeted for drug tests like people on food stamps.
“Why don’t we drug test all the members of Congress here,” McGovern said shortly before the drug-testing measure passed. “Force everybody to go urinate in a cup or see whether or not anybody is on drugs? Maybe that will explain why some of these amendments are coming up or why some of the votes are turning out the way they are.”
The fate of the food stamp drug testing provision is in the hands of a House-Senate conference committee hashing out differences between food stamp and farm legislation that passed the two chambers. It’s got a chance. Last year, Congress passed a law to let states drug-test some unemployment insurance recipients.
Radel apologized Tuesday for his cocaine bust and said he’d seek treatment.
“I struggle with the disease of alcoholism, and this led to an extremely irresponsible choice,” he said.
Source
Fuck him. Throw him to the wolves. I'm tired of hypocritical assholes like him. He comes off so self righteous only to a be a sinner himself and the worst kind. Like Lamont Hill said this asshole had no problem taking food out of the mouths of you and your children. He has no problem denying you food because you used medical marijuana to save your life and now that you've come up positive for drugs you are cut off from food stamps. A program you need to feed yourself and your family. This prick asks for love and compassion when it comes to him but he has no problem imposing draconian measures on the rest of us. This clown needs punishment. I say we contact our Congressperson and the Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and let them know of our disgust and that We The People are not going to take it anymore.
“It’s really interesting it came on the heels of Republicans voting on everyone who had access to food stamps get drug tested,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) told BuzzFeed Tuesday. “It’s like, what?”
The House over the summer approved an amendment by Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C.) that would let states drug test people on food stamps. The amendment passed by voice vote, meaning members’ individual yeas and nays were not recorded. Radel later voted in favor of a broader food stamps bill that included Hudson’s measure.
In support of his drug testing legislation, Hudson cited the many state legislatures around the country that had considered similar requirements for other means-tested programs in recent years.
“This is a clear and obvious problem in our communities as nearly 30 states have introduced legislation to drug test for welfare programs,” Hudson said. “We have a moral obligation to equip the states with the tools they need to discourage the use of illegal drugs.”
Most of the state legislation was authored by Republicans. Oftentimes, state Democrats responded by suggesting lawmakers should be subject to tests as well. If the government’s going to make sure recipients of taxpayer-funded benefits are clean, the argument went, then why not also make sure the recipients of taxpayer salaries are clean, too?
In June, Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.) made that very suggestion when he questioned why recipients of crop insurance and other government benefits weren’t also targeted for drug tests like people on food stamps.
“Why don’t we drug test all the members of Congress here,” McGovern said shortly before the drug-testing measure passed. “Force everybody to go urinate in a cup or see whether or not anybody is on drugs? Maybe that will explain why some of these amendments are coming up or why some of the votes are turning out the way they are.”
The fate of the food stamp drug testing provision is in the hands of a House-Senate conference committee hashing out differences between food stamp and farm legislation that passed the two chambers. It’s got a chance. Last year, Congress passed a law to let states drug-test some unemployment insurance recipients.
Radel apologized Tuesday for his cocaine bust and said he’d seek treatment.
“I struggle with the disease of alcoholism, and this led to an extremely irresponsible choice,” he said.
Source
Fuck him. Throw him to the wolves. I'm tired of hypocritical assholes like him. He comes off so self righteous only to a be a sinner himself and the worst kind. Like Lamont Hill said this asshole had no problem taking food out of the mouths of you and your children. He has no problem denying you food because you used medical marijuana to save your life and now that you've come up positive for drugs you are cut off from food stamps. A program you need to feed yourself and your family. This prick asks for love and compassion when it comes to him but he has no problem imposing draconian measures on the rest of us. This clown needs punishment. I say we contact our Congressperson and the Speaker of the House Paul Ryan and let them know of our disgust and that We The People are not going to take it anymore.
Trump won the popular vote
Ever since the presidential election, liberals have been whining about the fact that Hillary Clinton should have beaten Donald Trump because she won the popular vote. However, some massive voter fraud was just uncovered that reveals that in reality, Trump was the one who won the popular vote.
Infowars reported that a whopping 3 million votes were cast by illegal immigrants in this election. This disturbing find was uncovered by Greg Phillips of the VoteFraud.org organization, who found that without the illegals, Trump likely won the popular vote.
“We have verified more than three million votes cast by non-citizens,” tweeted Phillips after saying that his group had completed an analysis of a database of 180 million voter registrations.
“Number of non-citizen votes exceeds 3 million. Consulting legal team,” he continued.
Current statistics say that Clinton won the popular vote by 630,000 votes, even though 7 million ballots are still uncounted at this time. Since basically all of the 3 million votes from illegal aliens were for Clinton, it appears that Trump actually won the popular vote by over 2 million votes.
Many illegals used the names of dead people to cast their ballots. On the morning of the election, there were 4 million dead people on American voter rolls.
Most states require IDs to vote, but there are also many that don’t. California, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming, and Washington, D.C., all require no identification from voters.
Source
Infowars reported that a whopping 3 million votes were cast by illegal immigrants in this election. This disturbing find was uncovered by Greg Phillips of the VoteFraud.org organization, who found that without the illegals, Trump likely won the popular vote.
“We have verified more than three million votes cast by non-citizens,” tweeted Phillips after saying that his group had completed an analysis of a database of 180 million voter registrations.
“Number of non-citizen votes exceeds 3 million. Consulting legal team,” he continued.
Current statistics say that Clinton won the popular vote by 630,000 votes, even though 7 million ballots are still uncounted at this time. Since basically all of the 3 million votes from illegal aliens were for Clinton, it appears that Trump actually won the popular vote by over 2 million votes.
Many illegals used the names of dead people to cast their ballots. On the morning of the election, there were 4 million dead people on American voter rolls.
Most states require IDs to vote, but there are also many that don’t. California, Illinois, Iowa, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nebraska, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Vermont, West Virginia, Wyoming, and Washington, D.C., all require no identification from voters.
Source
CONGRESS JUST VOTED TO STRIP ALL POWER FROM OBAMA FOR THE REST OF HIS PRESIDENCY!
It will take a lot of work to clean up the mess created by Obama. The House of Representatives just gave President-elect Trump a head start.With fewer than 10 weeks left as President, President Barack Obama’s time in the White House is about to be finished.
It couldn’t happen soon enough!
Now, Obama’s team is rushing to pass countless last-minute regulations to implement even more of Obama’s radical agenda. Presidents are infamous for controversial, last-minute decisions.
Now, the Republican-lead U.S. House of Representatives just took a major stand against Obama. They voted 240-to-179 to allow Congress to stop and un-do any last minute rules and regulations approved by Obama.
As the bill’s sponsor Rep. Darrell Issa explained, this bill stops Obama’s last-minute, shameful regulations forever:
“This bipartisan bill is about reviving the separation of powers to ensure our laws are written by the Representatives we actually vote for – not unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats who are on their way out the door. Presidents of both parties have made habit of enacting scores of last-minute regulations, with little oversight, to sneak in as much of their agenda as possible before the clock runs out on their time in office. The bill helps ensure this President, and any future president, will be held in check and that their policies have the proper level of scrutiny by both Congress and the American people. I’m pleased to see the House pass this important measure and look forward to its quick passage by our colleagues in the Senate.”
This is a massive victory for conservatives, trying to make the transition to a Trump administration easier to enact pro-growth, pro-job creation policies:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent a letter Wednesday to congressmen alerted them to the cost of regulations put on the books by administrations on their way out the door:
A recent report issued by the Regulatory Studies Center at the George Washington University entitled The Final Countdown; Projecting Midnight Regulations found that executive branch agencies typically issue a significantly greater number of rules during the final months of an administration in a rushed effort to implement remaining policy objectives. Midnight regulations issued by prior administrations have proven highly problematic and required subsequent correction. The ability of Congress to disapprove these rules under the CRA is limited by tight deadlines for action that make separate debate and votes on a rule-by-rule basis impractical.
FreedomWorks CEO Adam Brandon says he’s pleased with the House vote and he committed his Washington-based logistics and policy hub for Tea Party and conservative activists to working with Capitol Hill conservatives to return law-making authority to Congress.
Source
It couldn’t happen soon enough!
Now, Obama’s team is rushing to pass countless last-minute regulations to implement even more of Obama’s radical agenda. Presidents are infamous for controversial, last-minute decisions.
Now, the Republican-lead U.S. House of Representatives just took a major stand against Obama. They voted 240-to-179 to allow Congress to stop and un-do any last minute rules and regulations approved by Obama.
As the bill’s sponsor Rep. Darrell Issa explained, this bill stops Obama’s last-minute, shameful regulations forever:
“This bipartisan bill is about reviving the separation of powers to ensure our laws are written by the Representatives we actually vote for – not unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats who are on their way out the door. Presidents of both parties have made habit of enacting scores of last-minute regulations, with little oversight, to sneak in as much of their agenda as possible before the clock runs out on their time in office. The bill helps ensure this President, and any future president, will be held in check and that their policies have the proper level of scrutiny by both Congress and the American people. I’m pleased to see the House pass this important measure and look forward to its quick passage by our colleagues in the Senate.”
This is a massive victory for conservatives, trying to make the transition to a Trump administration easier to enact pro-growth, pro-job creation policies:
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce sent a letter Wednesday to congressmen alerted them to the cost of regulations put on the books by administrations on their way out the door:
A recent report issued by the Regulatory Studies Center at the George Washington University entitled The Final Countdown; Projecting Midnight Regulations found that executive branch agencies typically issue a significantly greater number of rules during the final months of an administration in a rushed effort to implement remaining policy objectives. Midnight regulations issued by prior administrations have proven highly problematic and required subsequent correction. The ability of Congress to disapprove these rules under the CRA is limited by tight deadlines for action that make separate debate and votes on a rule-by-rule basis impractical.
FreedomWorks CEO Adam Brandon says he’s pleased with the House vote and he committed his Washington-based logistics and policy hub for Tea Party and conservative activists to working with Capitol Hill conservatives to return law-making authority to Congress.
Source
Friday, November 18, 2016
The Trump Administration wants to do away with Net Neutraliy
From Demand Progress:
"Trump Win Means FCC's 'Net Neutrality' Regulation is Dead."
That's the blaring headline from Breitbart News, the website run by Steve Bannon, Trump's campaign chairman and now his chief strategist in the White House.1
And it's not just Breitbart. The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal are warning that Net Neutrality is in deep trouble.2,3
We're going to have to fight with all we have to save Net Neutrality. Will you chip in $5?
Yes, I'll chip in $5 to save Net Neutrality.
Trump has falsely called Net Neutrality a "top down power grab" and an "attack on the internet."4 And the front-runner for his choice as FCC chairman is an anti-Net Neutrality zealot and paid Verizon consultant.5
We know that we can't count on Republican leaders in Congress to push back they've gotten millions from Comcast and their telecom buddies and would be thrilled to overturn Net Neutrality.6
To save Net Neutrality, we're going to need a grassroots mobilization as big as what it took to enact it in the first place.
The good news is that Trump can't just get rid of Net Neutrality on his own. He's going to have to go through a lengthy rule-making process, giving us months to mount opposition.
But we're counting on you to stand with us—and to make sure we have the resources to fight back and win.
Net Neutrality is facing a mortal threat from the Trump presidency. Will you chip in $5 to help save it?
Thanks for standing with us,
Kurt Walters and the Demand Progress Team
1.Source
2.Source
3.Source
4.Source
5.Source
6.Source
"Trump Win Means FCC's 'Net Neutrality' Regulation is Dead."
That's the blaring headline from Breitbart News, the website run by Steve Bannon, Trump's campaign chairman and now his chief strategist in the White House.1
And it's not just Breitbart. The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal are warning that Net Neutrality is in deep trouble.2,3
We're going to have to fight with all we have to save Net Neutrality. Will you chip in $5?
Yes, I'll chip in $5 to save Net Neutrality.
Trump has falsely called Net Neutrality a "top down power grab" and an "attack on the internet."4 And the front-runner for his choice as FCC chairman is an anti-Net Neutrality zealot and paid Verizon consultant.5
We know that we can't count on Republican leaders in Congress to push back they've gotten millions from Comcast and their telecom buddies and would be thrilled to overturn Net Neutrality.6
To save Net Neutrality, we're going to need a grassroots mobilization as big as what it took to enact it in the first place.
The good news is that Trump can't just get rid of Net Neutrality on his own. He's going to have to go through a lengthy rule-making process, giving us months to mount opposition.
But we're counting on you to stand with us—and to make sure we have the resources to fight back and win.
Net Neutrality is facing a mortal threat from the Trump presidency. Will you chip in $5 to help save it?
Thanks for standing with us,
Kurt Walters and the Demand Progress Team
1.Source
2.Source
3.Source
4.Source
5.Source
6.Source
Tell your Senators to oppose the nomination of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General
From the Drug Policy Alliance:
This was our worst nightmare.
Donald Trump has picked Jeff Sessions to be the next Attorney General.
It really couldn’t get any worse.
Over these last four years we’ve made great gains across the political spectrum toward treating drug use as a health issue, not a criminal one. Jeff Sessions will try to dismantle all that.
Jeff Sessions is a drug war extremist. There’s really no way around that.
As a U.S. Senator from Alabama, Sessions called for increased federal marijuana enforcement, and said “good people don’t smoke marijuana.” He once joked that his only issue with the Ku Klux Klan was their drug use. He was even denied a federal judgeship 30 years ago, by a Republican-controlled Senate, for racist views.
Get ready for raids on marijuana businesses. Get ready for militarized, Reagan-era drug war tactics.
We can’t let this stand.
The Drug Policy Alliance and our allies will fight Jeff Sessions’ nomination in the Senate tooth and nail. He won’t be nominated until Donald Trump takes office and the new Congress is in session. But with only six new Senators taking office, we must start fighting now.
Tell your Senators to oppose Jeff Sessions for Attorney General.
This nomination makes it clear that the new administration will be an enemy of drug policy reform, and we’ll be fighting to defend our hard fought victories for the next four years.
You can help us fight any and all attempts to expand the drug war by becoming a sustaining member today. We’re going to need all the help we can get over these next four years, and just $10 a month will go a long way.
We will fight to preserve everything we’ve gained, and we’ll never stop advocating for drug laws grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights.
This was our worst nightmare.
Donald Trump has picked Jeff Sessions to be the next Attorney General.
It really couldn’t get any worse.
Over these last four years we’ve made great gains across the political spectrum toward treating drug use as a health issue, not a criminal one. Jeff Sessions will try to dismantle all that.
Jeff Sessions is a drug war extremist. There’s really no way around that.
As a U.S. Senator from Alabama, Sessions called for increased federal marijuana enforcement, and said “good people don’t smoke marijuana.” He once joked that his only issue with the Ku Klux Klan was their drug use. He was even denied a federal judgeship 30 years ago, by a Republican-controlled Senate, for racist views.
Get ready for raids on marijuana businesses. Get ready for militarized, Reagan-era drug war tactics.
We can’t let this stand.
The Drug Policy Alliance and our allies will fight Jeff Sessions’ nomination in the Senate tooth and nail. He won’t be nominated until Donald Trump takes office and the new Congress is in session. But with only six new Senators taking office, we must start fighting now.
Tell your Senators to oppose Jeff Sessions for Attorney General.
This nomination makes it clear that the new administration will be an enemy of drug policy reform, and we’ll be fighting to defend our hard fought victories for the next four years.
You can help us fight any and all attempts to expand the drug war by becoming a sustaining member today. We’re going to need all the help we can get over these next four years, and just $10 a month will go a long way.
We will fight to preserve everything we’ve gained, and we’ll never stop advocating for drug laws grounded in science, compassion, health and human rights.
Donald Trump is considering marijuana prohibitionist Senator Jeff Sessions as Attorney General
From NORML:
We have some dire news to share. This morning, President-Elect Trump announced his pick for Attorney General and it couldn’t be much worse for the marijuana law reform movement and our recent legalization victories.
Trump’s pick, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, is a militant prohibitionist. We could go into great detail about how Senator Sessions has been an outspoken opponent of reform for decades, but in this case his rhetoric is so off the wall...we’ll let his past statements speak for themselves:
It was the prevention movement that really was so positive, and it led to this decline. The creating of knowledge that this drug is dangerous, it cannot be played with, it is not funny, it's not something to laugh about, and trying to send that message with clarity, that good people don't smoke marijuana.
Lady Gaga says she's addicted to (marijuana) and it is not harmless.
You have to have leadership from Washington. You can't have the President of the United States of America talking about marijuana … you are sending a message to young people that there is no danger in this process. It is false that marijuana use doesn't lead people to more drug use. It is already causing a disturbance in the States that have made it legal.
His former colleagues testified Sessions used the n-word and joked about the Ku Klux Klan, saying he thought they were "okay, until he learned that they smoked marijuana."
SOUNDS CRAZY, RIGHT? DONATE TODAY TO HELP US BE READY TO FIGHT BACK
Senator Sessions is clearly off the reservation on this one and is diametrically opposed to the overwhelming public opinion which stands in favor of the legalization and regulation of marijuana. This could foreshadow some very bad things for the eight states that have legalized marijuana for adult use and the more than half of the country that has operating medical marijuana programs. With the authority the position of Attorney General provides, Sessions could immediately get to work attempting to block the implementation of the recent ballot initiatives, start dismantling a legal industry in Washington, Colorado, Oregon, and Alaska, and begin conducting massive raids on existing medical and recreational retail stores.
We must be ready to fight back. We must be ready to mobilize in defense of all of our hard fought victories. We already have our opponents calling for a recount in Maine and prohibitionists in Massachusetts working to gut core provisions like home cultivation from their state's initiative. With an assist from a newly minted prohibitionist Attorney General, things might get worse before they get better.
Help us send a message to President-Elect Trump and his Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions that the American people won’t stand for intervention into state marijuana programs and that we want to move towards descheduling at the federal level and legalization in all 50 states.
DONATE $20 TODAY TO HELP US RAISE $4,200 FOR OUR EMERGENCY RESPONSE FUND!
It would probably be a good idea if we contact President-elect Donald Trump and let him know that we are not that thrilled with the idea of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. You can contact Trump on facebook and/or twitter and let him know that we don't like the idea of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. Tell him Ted Cruz is a better choice. Cruz is not the prohibitionist that Sessions is and he is being considered for Attorney General along with Sessions.
We have some dire news to share. This morning, President-Elect Trump announced his pick for Attorney General and it couldn’t be much worse for the marijuana law reform movement and our recent legalization victories.
Trump’s pick, Alabama Senator Jeff Sessions, is a militant prohibitionist. We could go into great detail about how Senator Sessions has been an outspoken opponent of reform for decades, but in this case his rhetoric is so off the wall...we’ll let his past statements speak for themselves:
It was the prevention movement that really was so positive, and it led to this decline. The creating of knowledge that this drug is dangerous, it cannot be played with, it is not funny, it's not something to laugh about, and trying to send that message with clarity, that good people don't smoke marijuana.
Lady Gaga says she's addicted to (marijuana) and it is not harmless.
You have to have leadership from Washington. You can't have the President of the United States of America talking about marijuana … you are sending a message to young people that there is no danger in this process. It is false that marijuana use doesn't lead people to more drug use. It is already causing a disturbance in the States that have made it legal.
His former colleagues testified Sessions used the n-word and joked about the Ku Klux Klan, saying he thought they were "okay, until he learned that they smoked marijuana."
SOUNDS CRAZY, RIGHT? DONATE TODAY TO HELP US BE READY TO FIGHT BACK
Senator Sessions is clearly off the reservation on this one and is diametrically opposed to the overwhelming public opinion which stands in favor of the legalization and regulation of marijuana. This could foreshadow some very bad things for the eight states that have legalized marijuana for adult use and the more than half of the country that has operating medical marijuana programs. With the authority the position of Attorney General provides, Sessions could immediately get to work attempting to block the implementation of the recent ballot initiatives, start dismantling a legal industry in Washington, Colorado, Oregon, and Alaska, and begin conducting massive raids on existing medical and recreational retail stores.
We must be ready to fight back. We must be ready to mobilize in defense of all of our hard fought victories. We already have our opponents calling for a recount in Maine and prohibitionists in Massachusetts working to gut core provisions like home cultivation from their state's initiative. With an assist from a newly minted prohibitionist Attorney General, things might get worse before they get better.
Help us send a message to President-Elect Trump and his Attorney General nominee Jeff Sessions that the American people won’t stand for intervention into state marijuana programs and that we want to move towards descheduling at the federal level and legalization in all 50 states.
DONATE $20 TODAY TO HELP US RAISE $4,200 FOR OUR EMERGENCY RESPONSE FUND!
It would probably be a good idea if we contact President-elect Donald Trump and let him know that we are not that thrilled with the idea of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. You can contact Trump on facebook and/or twitter and let him know that we don't like the idea of Jeff Sessions as Attorney General. Tell him Ted Cruz is a better choice. Cruz is not the prohibitionist that Sessions is and he is being considered for Attorney General along with Sessions.
The man behind the marijuana ban for all the wrong reasons
If you look for the roots of America’s ban on cannabis, you’ll find nearly all roads lead to a man named Harry Anslinger. He was the first commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, which laid the ground work for the modern-day DEA, and the first architect of the war on drugs.
Anslinger was appointed in 1930, just as the prohibition of alcohol was beginning to crumble (it was finally repealed in 1933), and remained in power for 32 years. Early on, he was on record essentially saying cannabis use was no big deal. He called the idea that it made people mad or violent an “absurd fallacy.”
But when Anslinger was put in charge of the FBN, he changed his position entirely.
“From the moment he took charge of the bureau, Harry was aware of the weakness of his new position. A war on narcotics alone — cocaine and heroin, outlawed in 1914 — wasn’t enough,” author Johann Hari wrote in his book, “Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs.” “They were used only by a tiny minority, and you couldn’t keep an entire department alive on such small crumbs. He needed more.”
Consequently, Anslinger made it his mission to rid the U.S. of all drugs — including cannabis. His influence played a major role in the introduction and passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, which outlawed possessing or selling pot.
Fueled by a handful of 1920s newspaper stories about crazed or violent episodes after marijuana use, Anslinger first claimed that the drug could cause psychosis and eventually insanity. In a radio address, he stated young people are “slaves to this narcotic, continuing addiction until they deteriorate mentally, become insane, turn to violent crime and murder.”
In particular, he latched on to the story of a young man named Victor Licata, who had hacked his family to death with an ax, supposedly while high on cannabis. It was discovered many years later, however, that Licata had a history of mental illness in his family, and there was no proof he ever used the drug.
The problem was, there was little scientific evidence that supported Anslinger’s claims. He contacted 30 scientists, according to Hari, and 29 told him cannabis was not a dangerous drug. But it was the theory of the single expert who agreed with him that he presented to the public — cannabis was an evil that should be banned — and the press ran with this sensationalized version.
Narcotics Commissioner Harry J. Anslinger announces a series of raids in the nation’s big cities aimed at crippling the narcotics traffic in New York on Jan. 4, 1958. More than 500 suspected peddlers were bagged. AP
The second component to Anslinger’s strategy was racial. He claimed that black people and Latinos were the primary users of marijuana, and it made them forget their place in the fabric of American society. He even went so far as to argue that jazz musicians were creating “Satanic” music all thanks to the influence of pot. This obsession eventually led to a sort of witch hunt against the legendary singer Billie Holiday, who struggled with heroin addiction; she lost her license to perform in New York cabarets and continued to be dogged by law enforcement until her death.
“The insanity of the racism is a thing to behold when you go into his archives,” Hari told CBS News. “He claims that cannabis promotes interracial mixing, interracial relationships.”
The word “marijuana” itself was part of this approach. What was commonly known as cannabis until the early 1900s was instead called marihuana, a Spanish word more likely to be associated with Mexicans.
“He was able to do this because he was tapping into very deep anxieties in the culture that were not to do with drugs — and attaching them to this drug,” Hari said. Essentially, in 1930s America, it wasn’t hard to use racist rhetoric to associate the supposed harms of cannabis with minorities and immigrants.
So as the nationwide attitude towards cannabis began to fall in line with Anslinger’s, he testified before Congress in hearings for the Marijuana Tax Act. His testimony centered around the ideas he had been pushing all along — including a provocative letter from a local newspaper editor in Colorado, saying “I wish I could show you what a small marihuana cigaret can do to one of our degenerate Spanish-speaking residents.”
All these years later, many of the threads in Anslinger’s arguments are still present in the American conversation about legalizing marijuana. The act was passed in 1937, and the rest, they say, is history.
Source
Anslinger was appointed in 1930, just as the prohibition of alcohol was beginning to crumble (it was finally repealed in 1933), and remained in power for 32 years. Early on, he was on record essentially saying cannabis use was no big deal. He called the idea that it made people mad or violent an “absurd fallacy.”
But when Anslinger was put in charge of the FBN, he changed his position entirely.
“From the moment he took charge of the bureau, Harry was aware of the weakness of his new position. A war on narcotics alone — cocaine and heroin, outlawed in 1914 — wasn’t enough,” author Johann Hari wrote in his book, “Chasing the Scream: The First and Last Days of the War on Drugs.” “They were used only by a tiny minority, and you couldn’t keep an entire department alive on such small crumbs. He needed more.”
Consequently, Anslinger made it his mission to rid the U.S. of all drugs — including cannabis. His influence played a major role in the introduction and passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, which outlawed possessing or selling pot.
Fueled by a handful of 1920s newspaper stories about crazed or violent episodes after marijuana use, Anslinger first claimed that the drug could cause psychosis and eventually insanity. In a radio address, he stated young people are “slaves to this narcotic, continuing addiction until they deteriorate mentally, become insane, turn to violent crime and murder.”
In particular, he latched on to the story of a young man named Victor Licata, who had hacked his family to death with an ax, supposedly while high on cannabis. It was discovered many years later, however, that Licata had a history of mental illness in his family, and there was no proof he ever used the drug.
The problem was, there was little scientific evidence that supported Anslinger’s claims. He contacted 30 scientists, according to Hari, and 29 told him cannabis was not a dangerous drug. But it was the theory of the single expert who agreed with him that he presented to the public — cannabis was an evil that should be banned — and the press ran with this sensationalized version.
Narcotics Commissioner Harry J. Anslinger announces a series of raids in the nation’s big cities aimed at crippling the narcotics traffic in New York on Jan. 4, 1958. More than 500 suspected peddlers were bagged. AP
The second component to Anslinger’s strategy was racial. He claimed that black people and Latinos were the primary users of marijuana, and it made them forget their place in the fabric of American society. He even went so far as to argue that jazz musicians were creating “Satanic” music all thanks to the influence of pot. This obsession eventually led to a sort of witch hunt against the legendary singer Billie Holiday, who struggled with heroin addiction; she lost her license to perform in New York cabarets and continued to be dogged by law enforcement until her death.
“The insanity of the racism is a thing to behold when you go into his archives,” Hari told CBS News. “He claims that cannabis promotes interracial mixing, interracial relationships.”
The word “marijuana” itself was part of this approach. What was commonly known as cannabis until the early 1900s was instead called marihuana, a Spanish word more likely to be associated with Mexicans.
“He was able to do this because he was tapping into very deep anxieties in the culture that were not to do with drugs — and attaching them to this drug,” Hari said. Essentially, in 1930s America, it wasn’t hard to use racist rhetoric to associate the supposed harms of cannabis with minorities and immigrants.
So as the nationwide attitude towards cannabis began to fall in line with Anslinger’s, he testified before Congress in hearings for the Marijuana Tax Act. His testimony centered around the ideas he had been pushing all along — including a provocative letter from a local newspaper editor in Colorado, saying “I wish I could show you what a small marihuana cigaret can do to one of our degenerate Spanish-speaking residents.”
All these years later, many of the threads in Anslinger’s arguments are still present in the American conversation about legalizing marijuana. The act was passed in 1937, and the rest, they say, is history.
Source
Monday, November 14, 2016
From an email 2
Right now is very troubling times for our country. I know I experienced it the other day. We are overreacting as a nation. For instance I have an reoccurring facial rash that makes me very self conscious so when I go out I usually wear a ski mask. Professionalism is dead. You would think that bank employees would conduct themselves with more calmness and professionalism but this is not the case. I merely had to make a withdraw the other day. I wanted to tell the bank teller to place the money in the envelope or else my hand. But the rash makes speaking difficult so I wrote "Place the money in the envelope or else". I know times are bad but doing your job while crying and screaming "Don't. I have a family. Please" is no way to run a proper business. There are a lot of things we need to work on because it seems like the world is going crazy around me.
Sunday, November 13, 2016
Saturday, November 12, 2016
A thank you from NORML
From The National Organization to Reform Marijuana Laws:
Without a doubt, the landslide winner on Election Day was marijuana law reform. We legalized an adult's right to consume marijuana in Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, and California. We legalized patients' access in Arkansas and North Dakota, and we expanded their access in Florida and Montana. With resounding victories in red and blue states, it is clear that marijuana legalization enjoys mainstream, bipartisan support among the American people.
Over 20 percent of Americans reside in jurisdictions where the adult use of marijuana is legal. Well over half of US states now authorize the medical use of marijuana. But we must sustain these gains.
Now is the time to double down in our reform efforts. Not only do we need to ensure that our hard fought victories are upheld, but we also must push forward to expand the marijuana revolution elsewhere.
Our work is far from done and NORML plans on fighting harder than ever before to ensure that responsible marijuana consumers like you no longer face prosecution, stigmatization, or discrimination. But we need your help to ensure 2017 is our most successful year yet.
Your donation helps us mobilize the grassroots in cities and states to apply pressure to elected officials, to buy advertising to increase citizens awareness of the benefits of legalization, to provide legal support to assure that these new laws are implemented in a timely and proper manner, to host educational events across the country to defeat the reefer madness rhetoric being spread by the likes of Project SAM and Kevin Sabet, and to have a potent presence in Washington, DC to lobby Congress and the incoming administration to not upend these successful state programs and to amend federal law to comport with marijuana's rapidly changing legal and cultural status.
Can we count on you to stand with us?
Thanks to NORML and other organizations nationwide that got recreational or medical marijuana legalized in their states. As the newsletter states we had a lot of problems with the prohibitionists but we overcame them and we prevailed. We prevailed over a mountain of lies and scare tactics that in the light of reason are a spit in the face in the intelligence of the American voter and the American voters saw through their lies and deceptions. The only place that failed to get recreational marijuana passed was Arizona. Perhaps next time NORML can concentrate on getting recreational marijuana legalized there as well. No one should be arrested,prosecuted and incarcerated for marijuana. No one.
Without a doubt, the landslide winner on Election Day was marijuana law reform. We legalized an adult's right to consume marijuana in Maine, Massachusetts, Nevada, and California. We legalized patients' access in Arkansas and North Dakota, and we expanded their access in Florida and Montana. With resounding victories in red and blue states, it is clear that marijuana legalization enjoys mainstream, bipartisan support among the American people.
Over 20 percent of Americans reside in jurisdictions where the adult use of marijuana is legal. Well over half of US states now authorize the medical use of marijuana. But we must sustain these gains.
Now is the time to double down in our reform efforts. Not only do we need to ensure that our hard fought victories are upheld, but we also must push forward to expand the marijuana revolution elsewhere.
Our work is far from done and NORML plans on fighting harder than ever before to ensure that responsible marijuana consumers like you no longer face prosecution, stigmatization, or discrimination. But we need your help to ensure 2017 is our most successful year yet.
Your donation helps us mobilize the grassroots in cities and states to apply pressure to elected officials, to buy advertising to increase citizens awareness of the benefits of legalization, to provide legal support to assure that these new laws are implemented in a timely and proper manner, to host educational events across the country to defeat the reefer madness rhetoric being spread by the likes of Project SAM and Kevin Sabet, and to have a potent presence in Washington, DC to lobby Congress and the incoming administration to not upend these successful state programs and to amend federal law to comport with marijuana's rapidly changing legal and cultural status.
Can we count on you to stand with us?
Thanks to NORML and other organizations nationwide that got recreational or medical marijuana legalized in their states. As the newsletter states we had a lot of problems with the prohibitionists but we overcame them and we prevailed. We prevailed over a mountain of lies and scare tactics that in the light of reason are a spit in the face in the intelligence of the American voter and the American voters saw through their lies and deceptions. The only place that failed to get recreational marijuana passed was Arizona. Perhaps next time NORML can concentrate on getting recreational marijuana legalized there as well. No one should be arrested,prosecuted and incarcerated for marijuana. No one.
Wednesday, November 9, 2016
2016 election results
First of all congratulations to President-elect Donald Trump. We men joined together to send Killary the evil witch packing. I don't know where she is going but I know one place she ain't going and that is back to the White House. Feminists were backing Hillary and they ate a big bowl of shit. The difference between the two rallies was as different as night and day. The Trump rally upbeat and optimistic while the Clinton rally you could here people crying.
Not only have we chosen a new President we have chosen to repeal old archaic marijuana laws. Five states have gone for full legalization: Arizona,California,Maine,Massachusetts and Nevada. While other states are trying to legalize medical marijuana: Arkansas,Florida,Montana and North Dakota. Only the proposition in Arizona went down in flames. All the rest past. Yesterday 4 out of 5 states told the federal government to stuff their prohibition and 4 states decided that they would give medical marijuana a try. Yesterday was truly an historic day.
Not only have we chosen a new President we have chosen to repeal old archaic marijuana laws. Five states have gone for full legalization: Arizona,California,Maine,Massachusetts and Nevada. While other states are trying to legalize medical marijuana: Arkansas,Florida,Montana and North Dakota. Only the proposition in Arizona went down in flames. All the rest past. Yesterday 4 out of 5 states told the federal government to stuff their prohibition and 4 states decided that they would give medical marijuana a try. Yesterday was truly an historic day.
Sunday, November 6, 2016
Top ten reasons to legalize marijuana
Are you one of the almost 57 million Americans living in a state that’s voting on marijuana legalization this Tuesday, Nov. 8, 2016? Your vote YES may help end the criminality of marijuana for over one out of six Americans, bringing the total to almost one out of four Americans who will live in a legal state.
Here are the ten best reasons to help convince your friends and family to do the right thing and vote YES on legalization:
1) Legalized Marijuana is Safer than Alcohol and Tobacco
How did we end up in a society where the two most damaging drugs—alcohol and tobacco—are the two legal ones? There are over a half-million deaths annually from those two substances. They also lead to countless illnesses and injuries that affect society in health-care costs, lost productivity, and law-enforcement expenses.
Marijuana is non-toxic and has never caused a fatal overdose in over 7,000 years of recorded human use. Its greatest harm is the arrest, incarceration, and lifelong hurdles created by prohibition. Opponents worry about “putting a third legal drug on the menu,” as if marijuana isn’t already the third-most popular drug used in America. It’s already on the menu; you just have to commit a crime to order it.
2) Marijuana Prohibition is a Costly Failure
Next year is the 80th anniversary of the Marihuana Tax Act, our first nationwide attempt to suppress pot smoking. Back then, maybe a few hundred thousand people nationwide were “smoking reefers”. Today, it’s more likely than not that someone under age 50 has tried pot and there are over 30 million Americans consuming cannabis on a regular basis—whether it is “on the menu” or not.
The costs of this counter-productive prohibition are staggering. Since President Nixon declared a war on drugs, over 25 million Americans have been arrested for marijuana violations, costing us over $1 trillion to prosecute. But in the four states that have legalized, marijuana arrests have plummeted, crime has decreased, and youth use hasn’t budged.
3) Marijuana Prohibition Funds Gangs, Cartels, & Terrorists
The drug trade has long been a source of income for organized crime. But now that four states have legalized marijuana; their domestic product is beating imported Mexican marijuana in both price and quality. Mexican farmers growing for the vicious violent drug cartels have seen their returns drop from $100 per kilo to under $25.
Legalization isn’t going to put the cartels out of business—they’re criminals who will turn to other crimes for their funding. But we can take from them the market for the most widely-used drug and shrink their customer base substantially.
Heres another way to look at it: Why should we continue to give business opportunities to violent criminals who don’t pay taxes and follow no regulations?
4) Marijuana Prohibition Hurts Youth & Minorities Most
America is coming to grips with institutional racism in our criminal-justice system. Marijuana prohibition has been a prime factor in fueling that racism. African-Americans are four times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana violations, even though they use and sell marijuana at about the same rates.
Marijuana prohibition sets up an incentive for police to make easy arrests and reap forfeiture and drug grant dollars. This, in turn, leads police to concentrate on minority neighborhoods where pot smokers are more easily caught and have fewer resources to fight the charges. This contributes to the cycle of distrust between minority communities and the police. Legalization won’t fix bad racist cops, but it will provide them far less opportunity to act on their racism.
5) Legalized Marijuana Protects Kids Better Than Prohibition
For the past forty years, the Monitoring the Future survey has asked high school seniors how easy it would be for them to get a bag of pot. For forty years, the answer has consistently been between 80 to 91 percent of them claiming access to marijuana was either “easy” or “fairly easy.” That’s because weed dealers don’t check ID and don’t lose a license if they’re caught selling to a kid.
Nothing’s ever going to stop a determined kid from finding a joint, any more than kids today aren’t completely stopped from accessing alcohol and tobacco. But with those drugs, somewhere along the line a corrupt adult had to be involved. Now, kids sell weed to other kids. Legalization moves weed sales into secure, adults-only stores and reduces the profit potential for illegal sales. (When’s the last time you saw a high school tequila dealer?) Last year, with four legalized states, was the first year ever that “easy” access to weed for 12th graders dropped below 80 percent.
6) Legalized Marijuana is a Safe Therapeutic Supplement
While half the states have initiated protections for medical use of marijuana, that doesn’t legalize the use of marijuana by patients. Even in California, where nearly anybody can get a medical marijuana recommendation and possession of less than an ounce is just a $100 ticket, there are still over 2,000 people a year who go to jail for marijuana alone, serving an average of over five months in a cage.
That’s because doctor’s visits and medical cards cost money; it costs upwards of $400 in some states to qualify and register for a medical marijuana card. Why should a disabled person in poverty or a sick person suffering a condition not covered by law be treated as a criminal for using an herb safer than over-the-counter aspirin or cough syrup?
7) Legalized Marijuana Replaces Toxic, Addictive Pharmaceuticals
America is suffering from an opioid overdose epidemic. Legal pharmaceutical drugs kill more people annually than all illegal drugs combined. Marijuana is an herb one can grow at little cost and use to replace over 17 popular pharmaceutical medications. Legalizing marijuana will literally save the lives of countless patients.
The pharmaceutical industry knows this. That’s why Big Pharma has been funding anti-pot campaigns. This election, one of them, Insys Pharmaceuticals, has donated a half-million dollars to defeat legalization in Arizona. They’re a maker of Fentanyl, the opioid painkiller that took Prince’s life and is 100 times more powerful that heroin, and are seeking patents on synthetic cannabinoid drugs they’re researching.
8) Legalized Marijuana Opens the Possibilities of Industrial Hemp
The demonization of marijuana is so entrenched in America that we even ban the non-psychoactive variety known as industrial hemp. We are one of the few countries in the world engaged in the lunacy of banning a plant because it looks like one that gets you high.
It’s a little like banning powdered sugar because it resembles cocaine!
While many states have passed laws allowing for industrial hemp cultivation and the federal government has passed laws allowing that to happen, these are all work-arounds for a crop that our Founding Fathers grew freely and copiously. Marijuana legalization will help open up the uses of hemp from food to fuel, fiber to medicine, building material to revolutionary energy technologies and more.
9) Legalized Marijuana Raises Millions in New Tax Revenue
Legalization doesn’t invent marijuana; it just recognizes that it is a popular commodity that should be taxed and regulated like all other commodities. The market for marijuana is never going to go away; we can only determine who controls most of it—taxpaying, job-creating, law-abiding businesses, or murderous, police-corrupting, criminal cartels.
Prohibition doesn’t control marijuana—prohibition is the absence of control. States under prohibition gain nothing from it and spend money, time, and resources enforcing it. The four states that have legalized marijuana have already reaped over $200 million in combined tax revenue, while saving money in the police department, courts, prisons, parole and probation offices, and other agencies that are burdened by pot prosecutions.
10)Legalized Marijuana Works!
It’s not 2009 anymore. Legalization of marijuana isn’t some hypothetical policy proposal—we’ve done it already in four other states. We had some initial difficulties concerning kids and edibles, but those have been addressed through education, labeling, and packaging changes the newly-legalizing states will adopt as well. Meanwhile, the older folks that legalization was intended for have increased their use substantially.
But despite putting legal marijuana “on the menu,” the roads are safer than ever, overall driving fatalities are down, workplace productivity is up, problematic dependence on marijuana is unchanged, and millions of dollars in tax revenue are rolling in. In Colorado alone, legalization has created over 18,000 jobs and contributed over $2.5 billion to the state economy.
Source
Here are the ten best reasons to help convince your friends and family to do the right thing and vote YES on legalization:
1) Legalized Marijuana is Safer than Alcohol and Tobacco
How did we end up in a society where the two most damaging drugs—alcohol and tobacco—are the two legal ones? There are over a half-million deaths annually from those two substances. They also lead to countless illnesses and injuries that affect society in health-care costs, lost productivity, and law-enforcement expenses.
Marijuana is non-toxic and has never caused a fatal overdose in over 7,000 years of recorded human use. Its greatest harm is the arrest, incarceration, and lifelong hurdles created by prohibition. Opponents worry about “putting a third legal drug on the menu,” as if marijuana isn’t already the third-most popular drug used in America. It’s already on the menu; you just have to commit a crime to order it.
2) Marijuana Prohibition is a Costly Failure
Next year is the 80th anniversary of the Marihuana Tax Act, our first nationwide attempt to suppress pot smoking. Back then, maybe a few hundred thousand people nationwide were “smoking reefers”. Today, it’s more likely than not that someone under age 50 has tried pot and there are over 30 million Americans consuming cannabis on a regular basis—whether it is “on the menu” or not.
The costs of this counter-productive prohibition are staggering. Since President Nixon declared a war on drugs, over 25 million Americans have been arrested for marijuana violations, costing us over $1 trillion to prosecute. But in the four states that have legalized, marijuana arrests have plummeted, crime has decreased, and youth use hasn’t budged.
3) Marijuana Prohibition Funds Gangs, Cartels, & Terrorists
The drug trade has long been a source of income for organized crime. But now that four states have legalized marijuana; their domestic product is beating imported Mexican marijuana in both price and quality. Mexican farmers growing for the vicious violent drug cartels have seen their returns drop from $100 per kilo to under $25.
Legalization isn’t going to put the cartels out of business—they’re criminals who will turn to other crimes for their funding. But we can take from them the market for the most widely-used drug and shrink their customer base substantially.
Heres another way to look at it: Why should we continue to give business opportunities to violent criminals who don’t pay taxes and follow no regulations?
4) Marijuana Prohibition Hurts Youth & Minorities Most
America is coming to grips with institutional racism in our criminal-justice system. Marijuana prohibition has been a prime factor in fueling that racism. African-Americans are four times more likely than whites to be arrested for marijuana violations, even though they use and sell marijuana at about the same rates.
Marijuana prohibition sets up an incentive for police to make easy arrests and reap forfeiture and drug grant dollars. This, in turn, leads police to concentrate on minority neighborhoods where pot smokers are more easily caught and have fewer resources to fight the charges. This contributes to the cycle of distrust between minority communities and the police. Legalization won’t fix bad racist cops, but it will provide them far less opportunity to act on their racism.
5) Legalized Marijuana Protects Kids Better Than Prohibition
For the past forty years, the Monitoring the Future survey has asked high school seniors how easy it would be for them to get a bag of pot. For forty years, the answer has consistently been between 80 to 91 percent of them claiming access to marijuana was either “easy” or “fairly easy.” That’s because weed dealers don’t check ID and don’t lose a license if they’re caught selling to a kid.
Nothing’s ever going to stop a determined kid from finding a joint, any more than kids today aren’t completely stopped from accessing alcohol and tobacco. But with those drugs, somewhere along the line a corrupt adult had to be involved. Now, kids sell weed to other kids. Legalization moves weed sales into secure, adults-only stores and reduces the profit potential for illegal sales. (When’s the last time you saw a high school tequila dealer?) Last year, with four legalized states, was the first year ever that “easy” access to weed for 12th graders dropped below 80 percent.
6) Legalized Marijuana is a Safe Therapeutic Supplement
While half the states have initiated protections for medical use of marijuana, that doesn’t legalize the use of marijuana by patients. Even in California, where nearly anybody can get a medical marijuana recommendation and possession of less than an ounce is just a $100 ticket, there are still over 2,000 people a year who go to jail for marijuana alone, serving an average of over five months in a cage.
That’s because doctor’s visits and medical cards cost money; it costs upwards of $400 in some states to qualify and register for a medical marijuana card. Why should a disabled person in poverty or a sick person suffering a condition not covered by law be treated as a criminal for using an herb safer than over-the-counter aspirin or cough syrup?
7) Legalized Marijuana Replaces Toxic, Addictive Pharmaceuticals
America is suffering from an opioid overdose epidemic. Legal pharmaceutical drugs kill more people annually than all illegal drugs combined. Marijuana is an herb one can grow at little cost and use to replace over 17 popular pharmaceutical medications. Legalizing marijuana will literally save the lives of countless patients.
The pharmaceutical industry knows this. That’s why Big Pharma has been funding anti-pot campaigns. This election, one of them, Insys Pharmaceuticals, has donated a half-million dollars to defeat legalization in Arizona. They’re a maker of Fentanyl, the opioid painkiller that took Prince’s life and is 100 times more powerful that heroin, and are seeking patents on synthetic cannabinoid drugs they’re researching.
8) Legalized Marijuana Opens the Possibilities of Industrial Hemp
The demonization of marijuana is so entrenched in America that we even ban the non-psychoactive variety known as industrial hemp. We are one of the few countries in the world engaged in the lunacy of banning a plant because it looks like one that gets you high.
It’s a little like banning powdered sugar because it resembles cocaine!
While many states have passed laws allowing for industrial hemp cultivation and the federal government has passed laws allowing that to happen, these are all work-arounds for a crop that our Founding Fathers grew freely and copiously. Marijuana legalization will help open up the uses of hemp from food to fuel, fiber to medicine, building material to revolutionary energy technologies and more.
9) Legalized Marijuana Raises Millions in New Tax Revenue
Legalization doesn’t invent marijuana; it just recognizes that it is a popular commodity that should be taxed and regulated like all other commodities. The market for marijuana is never going to go away; we can only determine who controls most of it—taxpaying, job-creating, law-abiding businesses, or murderous, police-corrupting, criminal cartels.
Prohibition doesn’t control marijuana—prohibition is the absence of control. States under prohibition gain nothing from it and spend money, time, and resources enforcing it. The four states that have legalized marijuana have already reaped over $200 million in combined tax revenue, while saving money in the police department, courts, prisons, parole and probation offices, and other agencies that are burdened by pot prosecutions.
10)Legalized Marijuana Works!
It’s not 2009 anymore. Legalization of marijuana isn’t some hypothetical policy proposal—we’ve done it already in four other states. We had some initial difficulties concerning kids and edibles, but those have been addressed through education, labeling, and packaging changes the newly-legalizing states will adopt as well. Meanwhile, the older folks that legalization was intended for have increased their use substantially.
But despite putting legal marijuana “on the menu,” the roads are safer than ever, overall driving fatalities are down, workplace productivity is up, problematic dependence on marijuana is unchanged, and millions of dollars in tax revenue are rolling in. In Colorado alone, legalization has created over 18,000 jobs and contributed over $2.5 billion to the state economy.
Source
Rainbow mafia wants to ram through Merrick Garland's SCOTUS nomination
From Public Advocate:
I have terrible news to report.
The radical Homosexual Lobby is preparing to launch a massive blitz during the lame duck session to confirm their hand-picked Supreme Court Justice, Merrick Garland.
And, unfortunately, many weak-kneed Senators are ready to concede the fight -- even before the next President takes office.
In fact, many of them are already dropping like flies.
Sen. Mark Kirk and Sen. Susan Collins both immediately backed Garland.
While others, like Sen. Jerry Moran, have changed their position almost weekly.
This shows how contested the battle for the U.S. Supreme Court is, and why every signed petition matters!
And with just days remaining before the elections, Senators facing re-election are more vulnerable to constituent input.
That's why it's crucial you sign your "Hold the Line" petition to your U.S. Senators right away.
If you've already signed, please forward this email to every like-minded friend and family member and consider chipping in $10 or $25 right away.
You see, I predicted any nomination by Obama to the U.S. Supreme Court would be first approved by the radical Homosexual Lobby.
And as Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Garland has already voted to destroy Religious Liberty.
In the case, Priests for Life v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Garland voted to force Priests for Life to comply with the ObamaCare "morning after pill" mandate against their deeply-held religious beliefs.
It's clear pro-Family Americans can't count on Garland to defend Religious Liberty.
That's why it's important the Senate refuses to confirm his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.
You can be sure Obama and the radical Homosexual Lobby will be bringing the hammer down during the lame duck session over the holiday season.
As most Americans are focused on time with their families -- rightfully so -- it's also when the Homosexual Lobby is at its strongest.
That's why it's crucial I fight back by delivering a mountain-high stack of petitions opposing Obama's radical pick.
If Public Advocate is unable to deliver thousands of petitions, I'm afraid the Homosexual Lobby's entire radical Agenda may be forced into law by judicial activism.
That's why I hope you'll forward this email to everyone you know and chip in $10 or $25 right away so I can immediately collect petitions from like-minded Americans.
Thank you for all that you do.
For the Family,
HON. EUGENE DELGAUDIO
President, Public Advocate of the U.S.
P.S. The radical Homosexual Lobby is scheming to pressure the U.S. Senate into confirming Obama's radical pick for the U.S. Supreme Court, Merrick Garland, during the upcoming lame duck session.
It's up to you and me to respond immediately by delivering thousands of petitions from pro-Family Americans.
Please click here to sign your "Hold the Line" petition to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and your U.S. Senators right away.
If you've already signed, please forward this email to friends and family members and consider chipping in $10 or $25 right away so I can immediately collect petitions from like-minded Americans.
I have terrible news to report.
The radical Homosexual Lobby is preparing to launch a massive blitz during the lame duck session to confirm their hand-picked Supreme Court Justice, Merrick Garland.
And, unfortunately, many weak-kneed Senators are ready to concede the fight -- even before the next President takes office.
In fact, many of them are already dropping like flies.
Sen. Mark Kirk and Sen. Susan Collins both immediately backed Garland.
While others, like Sen. Jerry Moran, have changed their position almost weekly.
This shows how contested the battle for the U.S. Supreme Court is, and why every signed petition matters!
And with just days remaining before the elections, Senators facing re-election are more vulnerable to constituent input.
That's why it's crucial you sign your "Hold the Line" petition to your U.S. Senators right away.
If you've already signed, please forward this email to every like-minded friend and family member and consider chipping in $10 or $25 right away.
You see, I predicted any nomination by Obama to the U.S. Supreme Court would be first approved by the radical Homosexual Lobby.
And as Chief Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, Garland has already voted to destroy Religious Liberty.
In the case, Priests for Life v. United States Department of Health and Human Services, Garland voted to force Priests for Life to comply with the ObamaCare "morning after pill" mandate against their deeply-held religious beliefs.
It's clear pro-Family Americans can't count on Garland to defend Religious Liberty.
That's why it's important the Senate refuses to confirm his nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court.
You can be sure Obama and the radical Homosexual Lobby will be bringing the hammer down during the lame duck session over the holiday season.
As most Americans are focused on time with their families -- rightfully so -- it's also when the Homosexual Lobby is at its strongest.
That's why it's crucial I fight back by delivering a mountain-high stack of petitions opposing Obama's radical pick.
If Public Advocate is unable to deliver thousands of petitions, I'm afraid the Homosexual Lobby's entire radical Agenda may be forced into law by judicial activism.
That's why I hope you'll forward this email to everyone you know and chip in $10 or $25 right away so I can immediately collect petitions from like-minded Americans.
Thank you for all that you do.
For the Family,
HON. EUGENE DELGAUDIO
President, Public Advocate of the U.S.
P.S. The radical Homosexual Lobby is scheming to pressure the U.S. Senate into confirming Obama's radical pick for the U.S. Supreme Court, Merrick Garland, during the upcoming lame duck session.
It's up to you and me to respond immediately by delivering thousands of petitions from pro-Family Americans.
Please click here to sign your "Hold the Line" petition to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and your U.S. Senators right away.
If you've already signed, please forward this email to friends and family members and consider chipping in $10 or $25 right away so I can immediately collect petitions from like-minded Americans.
Meet the Marijuana Lifers California’s Prop 64 Could Set Free
California’s Proposition 64—The Adult Use of Marijuana Act (AUMA)—is a 62-page manifesto of government over-regulation. But ultimately, as the founder and director of the Marijuana Lifer Project, a non-profit organization that advocates for federal prisoners serving life sentences, I decided to vote yes because the initiative does a lot of good.
Under Prop 64, most marijuana felonies in the state of California will become misdemeanors, and that applies retroactively. This means state marijuana prisoners get an immediate chance at release. But even beyond state prisoners, this law will also help some federal prisoners.
One such inmate is Corvain Cooper, 37, serving a sentence of life without parole (LWOP) for a nonviolent marijuana conspiracy. Two California state priors for marijuana helped prosecutors win that harsh sentence in federal court. However, if Prop 64 passes, Corvain’s prior felonies would become misdemeanors, and he would no longer qualify for a life sentence.
Corvain Cooper prays to be reunited with his family. Prop 64 could help him get out of jail.
“I pray every night for the passage of this law,” Cooper said. “My daughters are depending on it, and I am tired of lying to them about when I am coming home. I want people to understand that their vote can give so many people a second chance at life. It gives me a second chance at life, and gives my daughters a second chance to spend the rest of their lives with their dad.”
Prop 64 will also help medical marijuana provider and federal prisoner Dustin Costa, 70, who has a prior cultivation felony in California on his record. As a marijuana activist, Costa expressed reservations about the initiative, but like me, ultimately came down on the pro side.
“I haven’t read Prop 64, but from what I’ve heard, it is pretty restrictive,” said Costa. “Nevertheless, its passage would legalize a drug that has been maligned for upwards of a century. What that means is that the public will finally have the opportunity for a fact-based learning experience. As for Prop 64 not going far enough, I think a better way to view it is as a pathway to understanding and thus a baby step toward full acceptance. I would vote for it on that basis alone, despite its shortcomings.”
Corvain Cooper and Dustin Costa have vested interests in the passage of Prop 64, but I wondered how other federal marijuana inmates, who would not be directly impacted, felt about activists encouraging people to vote against a legalization bill, regardless of how bad the bill might be.
Paul Free and Corvain Cooper in USP Atwater where they are serving life without parole for nonviolent marijuana offenses.
Paul Free, 66, also serving LWOP in USP Atwater along with Corvain Cooper, believes Prop 64’s passage will hasten prohibition’s end.
“If California—a state that’s the 6th largest economy in the world—legalizes, the feds are going to have to do something,” Free said.
John Knock doesn’t deserve to live his life in a cage for pot.
John Knock, 69, a first time offender sentenced to TWO life sentences for marijuana, echoed those sentiments: “Old hippies tend to think things should be perfect. In politics, that just doesn’t happen. The sooner it is passed the better it will be for all.”
Edwin Rubis, 48, who has already served 18 years of a 40-year sentence, had strong opinions.
“I believe that activists who are willing to wait longer for a better bill are not participating in their call to legalize marijuana,” Rubis said. “Any step is progress and to take a neutral or negative stance only adds to the severity of injustice. Failure to act in the affirmative is to cede that marijuana should remain illegal and thus, those of us incarcerated remain as is.”
Edwin Rubis has already served 18 years in jail for cannabis. Waiting for a perfect initiative is not a luxury he can afford. It was difficult for the prisoners I spoke with, some of whom have been waiting decades for a chance at freedom, to understand how and why the issue of legalizing marijuana has become as contentious to cannabis activists in California as the presidential election is to the general public.
Waiting for perfect bills is simply not a luxury any of these men can afford.
John Knock summed up the perspective well.
“The Union was designed for one state to try something and the rest to learn from that,” he said. “Colorado did it and now it’s time for California to step up, even if it is not perfect. What, if anything, is?”
Source
Under Prop 64, most marijuana felonies in the state of California will become misdemeanors, and that applies retroactively. This means state marijuana prisoners get an immediate chance at release. But even beyond state prisoners, this law will also help some federal prisoners.
One such inmate is Corvain Cooper, 37, serving a sentence of life without parole (LWOP) for a nonviolent marijuana conspiracy. Two California state priors for marijuana helped prosecutors win that harsh sentence in federal court. However, if Prop 64 passes, Corvain’s prior felonies would become misdemeanors, and he would no longer qualify for a life sentence.
Corvain Cooper prays to be reunited with his family. Prop 64 could help him get out of jail.
“I pray every night for the passage of this law,” Cooper said. “My daughters are depending on it, and I am tired of lying to them about when I am coming home. I want people to understand that their vote can give so many people a second chance at life. It gives me a second chance at life, and gives my daughters a second chance to spend the rest of their lives with their dad.”
Prop 64 will also help medical marijuana provider and federal prisoner Dustin Costa, 70, who has a prior cultivation felony in California on his record. As a marijuana activist, Costa expressed reservations about the initiative, but like me, ultimately came down on the pro side.
“I haven’t read Prop 64, but from what I’ve heard, it is pretty restrictive,” said Costa. “Nevertheless, its passage would legalize a drug that has been maligned for upwards of a century. What that means is that the public will finally have the opportunity for a fact-based learning experience. As for Prop 64 not going far enough, I think a better way to view it is as a pathway to understanding and thus a baby step toward full acceptance. I would vote for it on that basis alone, despite its shortcomings.”
Corvain Cooper and Dustin Costa have vested interests in the passage of Prop 64, but I wondered how other federal marijuana inmates, who would not be directly impacted, felt about activists encouraging people to vote against a legalization bill, regardless of how bad the bill might be.
Paul Free and Corvain Cooper in USP Atwater where they are serving life without parole for nonviolent marijuana offenses.
Paul Free, 66, also serving LWOP in USP Atwater along with Corvain Cooper, believes Prop 64’s passage will hasten prohibition’s end.
“If California—a state that’s the 6th largest economy in the world—legalizes, the feds are going to have to do something,” Free said.
John Knock doesn’t deserve to live his life in a cage for pot.
John Knock, 69, a first time offender sentenced to TWO life sentences for marijuana, echoed those sentiments: “Old hippies tend to think things should be perfect. In politics, that just doesn’t happen. The sooner it is passed the better it will be for all.”
Edwin Rubis, 48, who has already served 18 years of a 40-year sentence, had strong opinions.
“I believe that activists who are willing to wait longer for a better bill are not participating in their call to legalize marijuana,” Rubis said. “Any step is progress and to take a neutral or negative stance only adds to the severity of injustice. Failure to act in the affirmative is to cede that marijuana should remain illegal and thus, those of us incarcerated remain as is.”
Edwin Rubis has already served 18 years in jail for cannabis. Waiting for a perfect initiative is not a luxury he can afford. It was difficult for the prisoners I spoke with, some of whom have been waiting decades for a chance at freedom, to understand how and why the issue of legalizing marijuana has become as contentious to cannabis activists in California as the presidential election is to the general public.
Waiting for perfect bills is simply not a luxury any of these men can afford.
John Knock summed up the perspective well.
“The Union was designed for one state to try something and the rest to learn from that,” he said. “Colorado did it and now it’s time for California to step up, even if it is not perfect. What, if anything, is?”
Source
Legalization takes a bite out of organized crime
As the flow of cartel brick weed into the U.S. dwindles to due further legalization measures, the phenomenon of smuggling California pot southbound to Mexico has arisen.
The abundance of high-quality legal marijuana in California has created a demand in Mexico that local cartels can’t supply with their own homegrown product, reports KQED.
“If you’re in Mexico, and you want the best marijuana out there, there’s only one place to get it,” said Matthew Shapiro, a San Diego-based attorney specializing in marijuana, to KQED. “There’s no such thing as high-quality Mexican weed.”
Although smuggling drugs from either side of the border is both illegal and risky, southbound smuggling into Mexico is much easier, as drivers can sometimes cross the Tijuana border without ever stopping for Mexican officials.
Experts on both sides of the border believe that the demand for California pot in Mexico will rise if the state passes the proposition 64 initiative to legalize recreational marijuana for adult use.
“They can get it easily in the U.S., and they bring it back with them in small quantities — generally for their own consumption,” clinic director Raul Palacios said to KQED. “I don’t doubt that they share it with their friends, but not on a large scale.”
American marijuana legalization efforts have already caused a sharp decline in Mexican drug cartel revenues, and California’s impending decision could drive cartels further down.
“Two or three years ago, a kilogram [2.2 pounds] of marijuana was worth $60 to $90,” a Mexican marijuana grower told NPR news in December 2014. “But now they’re paying us $30 to $40 a kilo. It’s a big difference. If the U.S. continues to legalize pot, they’ll run us into the ground.”
Source
The abundance of high-quality legal marijuana in California has created a demand in Mexico that local cartels can’t supply with their own homegrown product, reports KQED.
“If you’re in Mexico, and you want the best marijuana out there, there’s only one place to get it,” said Matthew Shapiro, a San Diego-based attorney specializing in marijuana, to KQED. “There’s no such thing as high-quality Mexican weed.”
Although smuggling drugs from either side of the border is both illegal and risky, southbound smuggling into Mexico is much easier, as drivers can sometimes cross the Tijuana border without ever stopping for Mexican officials.
Experts on both sides of the border believe that the demand for California pot in Mexico will rise if the state passes the proposition 64 initiative to legalize recreational marijuana for adult use.
“They can get it easily in the U.S., and they bring it back with them in small quantities — generally for their own consumption,” clinic director Raul Palacios said to KQED. “I don’t doubt that they share it with their friends, but not on a large scale.”
American marijuana legalization efforts have already caused a sharp decline in Mexican drug cartel revenues, and California’s impending decision could drive cartels further down.
“Two or three years ago, a kilogram [2.2 pounds] of marijuana was worth $60 to $90,” a Mexican marijuana grower told NPR news in December 2014. “But now they’re paying us $30 to $40 a kilo. It’s a big difference. If the U.S. continues to legalize pot, they’ll run us into the ground.”
Source
Tuesday, November 1, 2016
Congress wants to tax the internet
From Ron Paul at Campaign For Liberty:
You and I fought long and hard...
We thought it was defeated...
But now it's back from the dead -- and it's coming for YOU!
No, I am not talking zombies or vampires.
I'm talking about the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate!
For three years, Campaign for Liberty members have stopped every attempt to pass legislation imposing new taxes and regulations on the Internet...
But, like deranged mad scientists, the Big Government, big business cabal in Congress will not let the Monster stay dead.
They are lurking in the shadows, waiting for the lame-duck session of Congress where they plan to ram the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate into law.
Taking cues from a Scooby Doo villain, they've disguised the Monster as a "compromise" that protects small businesses and consumers.
But when our gang rips that mask off, all versions of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate still:
***Raise prices on online goods
***Force businesses to comply with out-of-state tax laws
***Impose new regulations on the Internet that could prevent development of the next Amazon or eBay
This is a treat for the special interests...
But a trick for the American people!
I'm confident you and I can slay the Internet Sales Tax Mandate monster once again.
But we need to act now!
So please sign your "No Lame-Duck Internet Sales Tax Mandate" petition to your Representative and Senators today.
Right now, members of Congress are explicitly sensitive to the views of the people...
So if they see anti-Internet Sales Tax petitions coming into their offices in the days before the election, they are more likely to stand with us in opposition to taxing the Internet.
It is vital we get as many Representatives and Senators as possible on record in opposition to the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate before Congress returns for the lame-duck session.
I don't want to scare you, but...
The fact is, the powerful forces behind the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate are closer than ever to victory.
You see, earlier this year, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell -- the ringleader of the Internet Sales Tax Mandate in the Senate -- promised they would vote on the bill in 2016.
Senator McConnell has yet to fulfill his promise, most likely because he did not want to force vulnerable Republican Senators to choose between the people and the special interests before the election.
But in the lame-duck, he will think he is safe to move this bill since the people are burned out on politics and too busy with the holidays to pay attention to Congress.
So we must let Senator McConnell and his colleagues know that we are not going to back down -- instead, we will keep the heat on the Senate through the lame-duck!
But the Senate is not our only, or even our main, threat.
House Speaker Paul Ryan has recently endorsed the version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate that has been proposed by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Robert Goodlatte.
Ryan and Goodlatte claim their plan is "fair" to small businesses, even though -- unlike the Senate plan -- this bill does not include a small business exemption from the mandate.
And even if the Ryan-Goodlate plan is fair for business, it's not fair for consumers!
Like every other version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate, the Ryan-Goodlate plan raises prices on your online purchases.
But unlike other versions, the Ryan-Goodlatte plan doesn't even exempt small businesses from the mandate!
The Ryan-Goodlatte plan also imposes a complex and costly tax collection scheme on online commerce.
Proponents of the Ryan-Goodlate plan claim that these costs will be borne by state governments.
But you and I know that state-level bureaucrats and politicians will find a way to make sure the costs are "passed along" to consumers and taxpayers.
The Ryan-Goodlatte plan rewards tax-hungry governors and state legislators by giving them a fresh source of revenue, allowing them to continue their fiscally irresponsible ways.
This will only make the inevitable day of reckoning all the more painful.
Now, Capitol Hill sources have told me that Goodlatte is working with House supporters of the Senate version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate to find a "compromise" version of the legislation.
And you know that President Obama will be doing all he can to help broker such a compromise.
He would love to add "signed the National Internet Sales Tax Law" to his list of "accomplishments."
The good news is, Paul Ryan has not made any public pledges to vote on the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate.
If he knows that we will not accept any phony "compromise" that burdens the Internet with taxes and regulations, he will likely back down on his plan.
So please sign your "No Lame-Duck Internet Sales Tax" petition to your Representative and Senators asking them to publicly pledge to oppose any version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate in the lame-duck session.
And please make a generous contribution of $15, $10, or $5 to help Campaign for Liberty mobilize more Americans in opposition to the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate.
With your support, we will be able to contact thousands more anti-tax Americans in the weeks before the elections and keep the heat on Congress during the lame-duck session.
If funds permit, Campaign for Liberty will also run ads targeting wavering politicians across the Internet and social media.
In order to defeat the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate, you and I will need to keep the pressure on Congress from now until the end of the lame-duck.
But in order to do that, C4L will need resources we simply do not have.
While Campaign for Liberty's financial position has improved over the last few months, we still do not have the resources to even plan, much less run, the type of intensive, month-long program it will take to guarantee our success over the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate.
So if you can, please make a generous contribution of $15.
I know that is a lot, but with Paul Ryan now pushing a version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate, and with Mitch McConnell's pledge to act on it, the threat that a tax-free Internet could become a thing of the past is closer than ever.
So if $15 is too much, is there any way I can count on you for a special contribution of $10?
If we raise the resources this month, Campaign for Liberty can ramp up its efforts to get Representatives on record opposing the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate by running hard-hitting Internet ads before the election.
So if $10 is too much, could you make a contribution of $5?
And whatever you contribute, please make sure you sign your "No Lame-Duck Internet Sales Tax Mandate" petition to your Representative and Senators.
In Liberty,
Ron Paul
Chairman
P.S. Like mad scientists in a bad horror movie, special interests and their Congressional allies are reviving the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate for passage in the lame-duck session.
Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell promised Senate action, and House Speaker Paul Ryan is now pushing a new version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate.
If they get their way, online commerce could soon be crippled with taxes and regulations.
That's why you and I must turn up the heat on Congress starting now -- when they are listening especially closely to grassroots activists.
Please sign your "No Lame-Duck Internet Sales Tax Mandate" petition to your Representative and Senators demanding they pledge to oppose any legislation containing any version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate in the lame-duck session.
You and I fought long and hard...
We thought it was defeated...
But now it's back from the dead -- and it's coming for YOU!
No, I am not talking zombies or vampires.
I'm talking about the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate!
For three years, Campaign for Liberty members have stopped every attempt to pass legislation imposing new taxes and regulations on the Internet...
But, like deranged mad scientists, the Big Government, big business cabal in Congress will not let the Monster stay dead.
They are lurking in the shadows, waiting for the lame-duck session of Congress where they plan to ram the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate into law.
Taking cues from a Scooby Doo villain, they've disguised the Monster as a "compromise" that protects small businesses and consumers.
But when our gang rips that mask off, all versions of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate still:
***Raise prices on online goods
***Force businesses to comply with out-of-state tax laws
***Impose new regulations on the Internet that could prevent development of the next Amazon or eBay
This is a treat for the special interests...
But a trick for the American people!
I'm confident you and I can slay the Internet Sales Tax Mandate monster once again.
But we need to act now!
So please sign your "No Lame-Duck Internet Sales Tax Mandate" petition to your Representative and Senators today.
Right now, members of Congress are explicitly sensitive to the views of the people...
So if they see anti-Internet Sales Tax petitions coming into their offices in the days before the election, they are more likely to stand with us in opposition to taxing the Internet.
It is vital we get as many Representatives and Senators as possible on record in opposition to the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate before Congress returns for the lame-duck session.
I don't want to scare you, but...
The fact is, the powerful forces behind the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate are closer than ever to victory.
You see, earlier this year, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell -- the ringleader of the Internet Sales Tax Mandate in the Senate -- promised they would vote on the bill in 2016.
Senator McConnell has yet to fulfill his promise, most likely because he did not want to force vulnerable Republican Senators to choose between the people and the special interests before the election.
But in the lame-duck, he will think he is safe to move this bill since the people are burned out on politics and too busy with the holidays to pay attention to Congress.
So we must let Senator McConnell and his colleagues know that we are not going to back down -- instead, we will keep the heat on the Senate through the lame-duck!
But the Senate is not our only, or even our main, threat.
House Speaker Paul Ryan has recently endorsed the version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate that has been proposed by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Robert Goodlatte.
Ryan and Goodlatte claim their plan is "fair" to small businesses, even though -- unlike the Senate plan -- this bill does not include a small business exemption from the mandate.
And even if the Ryan-Goodlate plan is fair for business, it's not fair for consumers!
Like every other version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate, the Ryan-Goodlate plan raises prices on your online purchases.
But unlike other versions, the Ryan-Goodlatte plan doesn't even exempt small businesses from the mandate!
The Ryan-Goodlatte plan also imposes a complex and costly tax collection scheme on online commerce.
Proponents of the Ryan-Goodlate plan claim that these costs will be borne by state governments.
But you and I know that state-level bureaucrats and politicians will find a way to make sure the costs are "passed along" to consumers and taxpayers.
The Ryan-Goodlatte plan rewards tax-hungry governors and state legislators by giving them a fresh source of revenue, allowing them to continue their fiscally irresponsible ways.
This will only make the inevitable day of reckoning all the more painful.
Now, Capitol Hill sources have told me that Goodlatte is working with House supporters of the Senate version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate to find a "compromise" version of the legislation.
And you know that President Obama will be doing all he can to help broker such a compromise.
He would love to add "signed the National Internet Sales Tax Law" to his list of "accomplishments."
The good news is, Paul Ryan has not made any public pledges to vote on the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate.
If he knows that we will not accept any phony "compromise" that burdens the Internet with taxes and regulations, he will likely back down on his plan.
So please sign your "No Lame-Duck Internet Sales Tax" petition to your Representative and Senators asking them to publicly pledge to oppose any version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate in the lame-duck session.
And please make a generous contribution of $15, $10, or $5 to help Campaign for Liberty mobilize more Americans in opposition to the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate.
With your support, we will be able to contact thousands more anti-tax Americans in the weeks before the elections and keep the heat on Congress during the lame-duck session.
If funds permit, Campaign for Liberty will also run ads targeting wavering politicians across the Internet and social media.
In order to defeat the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate, you and I will need to keep the pressure on Congress from now until the end of the lame-duck.
But in order to do that, C4L will need resources we simply do not have.
While Campaign for Liberty's financial position has improved over the last few months, we still do not have the resources to even plan, much less run, the type of intensive, month-long program it will take to guarantee our success over the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate.
So if you can, please make a generous contribution of $15.
I know that is a lot, but with Paul Ryan now pushing a version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate, and with Mitch McConnell's pledge to act on it, the threat that a tax-free Internet could become a thing of the past is closer than ever.
So if $15 is too much, is there any way I can count on you for a special contribution of $10?
If we raise the resources this month, Campaign for Liberty can ramp up its efforts to get Representatives on record opposing the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate by running hard-hitting Internet ads before the election.
So if $10 is too much, could you make a contribution of $5?
And whatever you contribute, please make sure you sign your "No Lame-Duck Internet Sales Tax Mandate" petition to your Representative and Senators.
In Liberty,
Ron Paul
Chairman
P.S. Like mad scientists in a bad horror movie, special interests and their Congressional allies are reviving the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate for passage in the lame-duck session.
Senate Majority leader Mitch McConnell promised Senate action, and House Speaker Paul Ryan is now pushing a new version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate.
If they get their way, online commerce could soon be crippled with taxes and regulations.
That's why you and I must turn up the heat on Congress starting now -- when they are listening especially closely to grassroots activists.
Please sign your "No Lame-Duck Internet Sales Tax Mandate" petition to your Representative and Senators demanding they pledge to oppose any legislation containing any version of the National Internet Sales Tax Mandate in the lame-duck session.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
