May I let my voice be a clarion call. I will use these words for justice. I will use these words for truth. And humour.

Thursday, May 31, 2012

 

Why Talk about Cannabis?

A friend on Facebook recently questioned why I have a bug up my butt regarding President Obama's position on cannabis.  Here is my initial response, which I am saving here for later honing toward a more succinct draft:

Regarding your comment, "Cannabis? really?" I am led to believe that it's not really an issue for you?  Our president has also laughed it off several times as a non-issue.  That is most marginalizing to a community of people already in danger of becoming lower than second-class citizens.

In case you consider cannabis to really not be an issue, consider these three things.  First, among the wide diversity of cannabis strains, there is definitely legitimate medicine for many people suffering from MS, Crohn's/IBS, cancer, glaucoma, arthritis and epilepsy.  It is arguably (although less so) medicine for some people with chronic pain/inflammation, anxiety, ADHD, Alzheimer's, and a host of other maladies.  And everyone knows it has side effects, such as euphoria, paranoia (likely amplified by its illegality), lethargy, and short-term memory issues.  Compare those side effects to the cautionary list at the end of your average pharmaceutical commercial, and you may be surprised at what some people consider 'acceptable' side effects.  After giving states the green light in 2009, the Obama Administration has recently done a 170-degree turn on its states' rights policies, and has used the IRS, the DOJ and the DEA to force the businesses with the best practices and the best reputations--operating as model members of their communities, and within the state laws--out of business.  These are not the thug-operations that are basically no better than drug dealers with a lease on a shanty.  They were doing their best to follow state laws, turning people away with incorrect authorization, testing the products for potency and to make sure there are no fungus, mold, or pesticides, and labeling as accurately as possible.  They were/are truly trying to serve those who need it medically.  As the feds attempt to shove it all back underground, those people are running low on quality options.

The second important consideration is that the drug war is: a race war, a class war, and a culture war, all wrapped up into one.  It is not a war on drugs.  It is a selective war on people--our own people.  A quick look around at the arrest, conviction, and incarceration rates can tell you which categories of people are most affected.  People of color, stopped for DWB and a car search that finds a baggie of weed for example, become ensnared in a system that benefits from keeping them ensnared.  The prison-industrial complex is alive and well, privatizing profits while taking our tax dollars, requesting the government to help keep their prisons full!  For more on that, read Michelle Alexander's "The New Jim Crow."  Our nation's young men of color (though probably anybody would do) are worth more to some segments of the investor class behind bars than anywhere else.  Meanwhile, in richer, whiter neighborhoods, people have custom-made marijuana-infused cakes and pastries delivered to their parties.  If caught, they can pay for a good lawyer and get off scot-free like Rush Limbaugh.  That touches on the class and race war elements.  Regarding the culture war, it's no coincidence that the war on drugs started in 1970 on Nixon's watch, directed against the countercultural elements who happened to not only like being intoxicated in this fashion, but were also against Vietnam.  With the rise of the military-industrial complex, we've seen the militarization of the drug war as well.  Not a coincidence.  The poor, the people of color, and the people of the counterculture all have common cause here even if they're from different social locations.  Meanwhile, those who perpetuate the drug war are interested in marginalizing the voices of all of these people.

The third issue is money.   Five hundred leading economists, including Milton Friedman, have stated that it makes clear economic sense to legalize.  Money spent incarcerating people for using a substance safer than alcohol and tobacco is wasted money.  With federal support, however, drug programs are easy money to collect for local law enforcement looking to bolster their budgets.  It's money that goes down the tubes, however.  Putting a person needlessly in prison costs >$30k/year.  Meanwhile, the person who comes out of a punitive prison system is not likely to be a better person, and with a felony on their record, will no longer be as employable to our economy simply because of that mar on their record, and we have another person either struggling at odd jobs, returning to the drug trade (which perhaps they didn't even do before, but now have scarce options), or living on the dole if they can.  Instead of spending that $30k on prisons, it could be spent on educating our youth, or on really rehabilitating and restoring people with real drug problems.  Obama has talked a good game on the benefits of treating the drug problem as a public health issue, but the proof is in the pudding.  As a portion of budget outlay, police intervention is still the lion's share of the strategy.  On the flip-side of the coin, there are arguments that with regulation and taxation, the government could earn a great new revenue stream.  I think that while it could certainly bring in some money--enough to counteract the additional public health costs of legalization--it wouldn't be enough to make a dent in the federal debt, or even in the annual deficit: http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/07/commentary/wastler/wastler/  But $10-20 billion isn't chump change either.  The real money comes indirectly from productivity gains as we are no longer decimating lives, families, and communities with a drug war that has done far more damage domestically and abroad than the drugs themselves could have done.

In the end, the question that needs to be asked is, "WHY are we needlessly creating and maintaining a criminal class, when the law as it stands undercuts people's healthcare options, when it perpetuates economic differences across race, class, and culture, and when it is driving us deeper in debt while supporting a prison industry that shrinks the economy, and not really creating anything of value?"

chant/prayer/mantra: stay on it. pax hominibus, agape to all, joel

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,


Sunday, July 10, 2011

 

Re: The final push in Oakland

Dear Mary Jane,

I imagine this Janice Hahn may be a good candidate, however
I will not be helping Organizing for America now or in 2012.

I am entirely disenfranchised with the right/centrist agenda Barack Obama has been pursuing.  His policies have amounted to making "Change We Can Believe In" the saddest hollow promise I've ever heard in my 42 years.

Specifically, his budgetary policies continue to serve the wealthy corporate investors in a fashion similar to George W Bush including offering to trade away social security; he is continuing to invest our military in wars upon wars rather than pursue more peaceable solutions; his administration
flip-flops on the drug war, muddying the legal waters while continuing to harass moral and innocent people in medical need, using taxpayer dollars as if they are criminals; and he has done astonishingly little to support renewable energy, compared to subsidies for fossil fuels and nuclear. 

Therefore, his name attached to your request does not inspire me to help you unless he truly becomes "The Change I Thought I Was Believing In."  Please send him this message--I voted for him in 2008, but he and any Democratic candidates he supports have squandered my good faith, and lost my support for 2012.

,
With peace and real hope,
Joel

"You never change things by fighting the existing reality.
To change something, build a new model that makes
the existing model obsolete."
 -Buckminster Fuller (Architect and Geometrist)


On 9 July 2011 15:09, Mary Jane Stevenson, CA.BarackObama.com <info@barackobama.com> wrote:

2012
Vote for Disappointment
Joel --

For the past several weeks, OFA California volunteers have been making calls and knocking on doors to help send Janice Hahn to Congress. And all of that work comes down to this, the final three days.

On Monday and Tuesday, it's all about getting out the vote. Will you join us in Oakland to help with the final push?

Here are the details:

What: Get out the vote for Janice Hahn

Where: 1714 Telegraph Avenue
Oakland, CA 94612

When: Tuesday, July 12th
10:00 am

RSVP now

Janice is the Democratic nominee in the 36th Congressional District's special election. She'll fight to create good jobs, support clean energy, and protect Medicare -- but only if we do our part to help her win.

RSVP to help out in Oakland on Tuesday:

http://my.barackobama.com/Calls-for-Janice-Hahn

Thanks,

Mary Jane

Mary Jane Stevenson
California State Director
Organizing for America

Paid for by Obama for America
This email was sent to:@gmail.com

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Tuesday, August 3, 2010

 

Quick list of industries that would fight against cannabis legalization

.
  • Alcohol and Tobacco companies (competing recreational interests)
  • Pharmaceutical companies (competing medicinal interests -- they try to derive Marinol, which is only THC)
  • Corn-Ethanol producers (competing with hemp, when hemp can create much more oil/acre)
  • Oil companies (competing with hemp oil when it's easy to grow, compared to difficult to extract)
  • Cotton and other textiles industries (hemp lasts longer, doesn't shrink, easier to produce)
  • Timber (hemp can be made into paper and similar products, plus can be grown much more quickly than trees)
  • Agribusiness support such as Monsanto (hemp grows SO easily and doesn't require special seeds. it's more nutritious and the seeds in cereals, etc, have more fiber)
  • Law enforcement (as long as hemp and cannabis are illegal, there is definite job security)
  • Prison industry, including the privately-run prisons (1% of US population in prison, over half that non-violent drug users..., and the prisons get paid per prisoner)
  • The military supply industry, and also many corporations such as Target Stores, Microsoft, Motorola, etc, because "Hey, prison labor is dirt cheap!"
  • Politicians whose bases believe the rhetoric. They fear that if they stand up against prohibition, they will be voted out.
  • Drug cartels in Mexico and the US, which make tons of money because everything they do is under the table, and they get paid a ton compared to what their product would cost if it were legal.
  • Cannabis growing farms for dispensaries, and all of the niches that have sprung up as a result of the "pseudo-legality" of Cannabis, such as pot-docs, ID card places, and dispensaries. With legalization, they would have to compete in a much tighter market, and the jobs of pot-docs and ID card manufacturers would dissolve. And good riddance.

pax hominibus,agape to all,joel

Labels: , , , ,


Monday, October 12, 2009

 

25 Principles for Just Immigration Reform

.
I know I haven't said all that much on immigration reform, but that doesn't mean I haven't been thinking on it, and I just came across an article with a long list of principles that should be satisfied by meaningful immigration reform. I agree with these.

Three key points:
1. The US has created a system where undocumented immigrants have no legal recourse, and businesses that hire them can treat them very unfairly without fear of recrimination.
2. US policies of interference in other countries (Including the drug war in Mexico and Columbia, School of the Americas harming the countries of Central America, and a variety of unfair lending practices that leave developing nations in the lurch) leave those countries economically destitute, forcing their workforce to other countries (including the US) to find work. Those practices need to end, so that our country is not exploiting the labor of other countries. We need to explore ways of real cooperation.
3. Incarcerating undocumented immigrants and putting them to work in prison at sub-minimum wage? Highly unethical, yet this treatment seems par for the course for those incarcerated in US prisons.

chant/prayer/mantra: May we all recognize our common humanity, beyond any thoughts to human-created national boundaries.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

Labels: , , , , , , , ,


Saturday, May 9, 2009

 

Housing the Homeless on a Budget

.
I just came across this story about a developer in India who is building and selling condominium apartments for between $7800 and $13,400 each. That's not annual rent. That is the price it costs to purchase and own these units. Here's the simple floorplans, ranging in size from 283 to 465 square feet. This is the same guy who developed and marketed the $2000 car.

According to a study two years ago, there were 744,000 homeless people in the United States. The average price of one of these condominiums is $10,000.

Okay, let's do the math. But first, let's say that apartments like this actually cost a little more to build in the United States. Say it costs twice that, so it's $20,000 per condominium. And let's assume that the number of homeless in the U.S. has tripled with this economic recession/depression, so we have an estimate of roughly 2.5 million homeless now.
And let's assume that not every homeless person is single, and that these apartments are going to be suitable for two people each. That means we divide by two.

DOING THE MATH:
2,500,000 x 20,000 / 2 = ?

25 billion dollars!
For only 25 billion dollars, the United States could have addresses for every homeless person, and a place to lay their head down and call their own. Without home addresses, it's really difficult to get a job, because where will potential employers contact you? This would only help the economy. We spent 700 billion dollars (and much much more) to try and bail out the bankers (who by and large still have homes after screwing us, thank you very much). That is 28 times as much as it would cost to give all of our homeless people homes.

I've already done this math before. This is the second time I've specifically mentioned this here. My thinking this time agrees with my thinking then.

The United States is a sad, sad place if we can't do this. No, it's not that we can't do it. It's that those who control where resources go refuse (or do not have the will) to do it. Guilt and shame, to the highest order of magnitude, rides upon the heads of all those who have the capacity to make this happen but do not. HERE IS A CASE OF THE GOOD SAMARITAN WRIT LARGE, and being "good Sam" in this case doesn't even require these people to spend their own money to make it happen -- only to dedicate a portion of the budget from our commonwealth. Honor and true pride can swell within those who dedicate resources to making this happen, and see it through.

And I realize that I was here talking about the United States, because that is presently the primary domain of my jurisdiction, but this simple mathematics can be extended to everywhere on the planet. If there are 500 million people without homes across this planet, the math works out to 2.5 trillion dollars. A seemingly large sum, but not when you think about it over the long haul, and of the benefits it would provide.


lyrics:
"Feed the babies
Who don't have enough to eat
Shoe the children
With no shoes on their feet
House the people
Livin' in the street
Oh, oh, theres a solution."
From Fly Like an Eagle, by Steve Miller

colors: Brown, as in the new mud huts for everyone. BTW, I hope that these apartments are eco-friendly. For this to be a real solution, they should be as eco-friendly and sustainable as possible.

mood: Hopeful.

chant/prayer/mantra: A place for everybody.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

PS- Here's an even more affordable housing design, perhaps preferable, and from a company with a true eco-friendly, people-friendly mission statement.

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Tuesday, March 31, 2009

 

Indictment. Seriously.

 
I am hesitant to despoil my beautiful blog with the visage of this man who has caused so much calamity in the U.S. and in the world, but I feel that for the purposes of bringing the world back to just and right relationship, some very serious crimes need to be accounted for.

Here is a man who lied and cheated his way into the presidency.  Born with a silver spoon in his mouth, and then used that presidency to direct the taxpayers' money (including future taxes -- his administration borrowed HUGE sums of money, which will have to be paid back) into wars and into the pockets of the rich.  The list of atrocities commited upon the American people is almost too much to fathom.  (There are people good wholesome values and convictions who were so upset by his anti-American fearmongering, warmongering, and obstinacy -- and calling it "American" from the highest seat of power -- in the face of justice that they are pretty near suffering from PTSD.)



You can't just go and trump up a war, then commit war crimes, and loot hundreds of billions or trillions of dollars, and then go hang out at your ranch.  If you can do all that, and walk away free, what kind of precedent does that set?  It means that for crimes where hundreds of thousands of people are killed, and hundreds of millions, if not billions, of people's lives are adversely affected, there is nothing to be done on behalf of the perpetrator.  The president of a country should be responsible to everyone, not the other way around.  The president is given a lot of power (and freedom -- not to be confused with 'license', which is what Bush and company took), and to allow them to abuse that freedom in order to impose upon other peoples' freedoms is neglect of the first order.

I want to be clear that I am NOT asking for retributive justice, though I must admit that over the course of the last 8 years, the idea of some grisly form of capital punishment for their evils has crossed my mind.  What I am asking for is restorative justice.  Those who have made things wrong must fully recognize what they have done, and work to put things back to the way they ought to be, so this kind of injustice cannot be done again.  I do wonder though, are these men entirely incorrigible?  In that case, they should be removed from society as a form of safety for society, but not as a form of punishment.

This new case brought up by a Spanish court promises to be interesting, but doesn't go after Bush or Cheney, and is probably non-binding, since extradition will be difficult at best, unless any of those named in the suit happen to travel to a country that would apprehend them on behalf o Spain.  Now, if other countries were to join suit, eventually the folks named would be trapped in the U.S. (which admittedly is still a pretty big place to travel in).  I wonder what it would take to have charges actually pressed in the U.S. itself?


lyrics: "Indictment!"
From Indictment, by Antibalas

colors: The New Red, White, and Blue

mood: Time for restorative justice.

chant/prayer/mantra: Peace to all people.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

Labels: , , , , , ,


Friday, March 27, 2009

 

Obama on Marijuana Legalization and the Economy?

.
So, today on the nation's first online question and answer session with President Obama, he took the time to address a question related to an issue that matters to many Americans.

His exact words were:
We took votes about which questions were going to be asked, and I think 3 million people voted, or 3.5 million voted.

I have to say that there was one question that was voted on that ranked fairly high, and that was whether legalizing marijuana would improve the economy [note: the live in-studio audience all starts chuckling at this point], and job creation, and ah -- I don't know what this says about the online audience, but I just want -- I don't want people to think that ah -- this was a fairly popular question -- and we want to make sure that it was answered.

The answer is 'No, I don't think that is a good strategy to grow our economy.'
And here is a link to the actual questions,* and not Obama's paraphrasing of it. Wow, there is a lot that could be said regarding this. It's late, and I'm going to bed soon, so I'll only say about half of it, and I'm going to be sloppy about citing sources (sorry). If you want the information, it's out there at the few links I will be providing.

First, it is great that he is having online question and answer sessions, to address questions that a plurality of Americans want to know about. As evidenced by the Bush administration's method of hand-picking reporters allowed into the reporter room, and heavily penalizing those who don't ask appropriate slow-pitch softball style questions, Obama could get through the presidency without doing this.

Second, honestly there are much more important issues in the United States to deal with than marijuana reform. There are wars to end and peace to begin, there are homeless and hungry and unemployed people. There are civil rights to be won for those in the LGBT community, and civil rights to be secured for people of color, and for immigrants. There are environmental issues that need addressing, and medical care for all. The list goes on and on.

But, as was evidenced during that brief stint when John McCain wanted to pull out of the debates because of the "Emergency Bail Out" bill (that gave all that money to banks that had greedily overleveraged themselves out of any semblance of fiscal balance), a good president needs to be able to handle more than one thing at once. Therefore in addition to the things mentioned above, President Obama should devote some of his time in office ending the "drug war" and reforming national policy regarding marijuana. Despite the difficulty of his answer today, I still believe that a decriminalization of marijuana is one among many of the "change we can believe in."

Third, I believe the audience was laughing partially from their own lack of comfort with this now-apparently-taboo topic, and also because to those who have not been on the front lines of the drug war, there is no context in which marijuana legalization actually makes sense, because there is no conversation or thought about it. Therefore the idea of legalization or decriminalization in order to boost the economy sounds like a tricky joke or something. But that question was indeed asked in earnest. Because MILLIONS of American lives depend on it. There are now millions of Americans who have been arrested for drug possession, and it affects their employability and their family life, and if they go to jail or prison, is a major DRAIN on the economy. Especially when prison or jail is NOT even an ethical answer for non-violent behavior. Those people could be working and paying money into the tax pool, rather than having their lives ruined behind bars while the prison system takes money out of the tax pool.

So, fourth, yes, there would be billions of dollars saved by eliminating the war on drugs*, so our taxes could go towards other things, instead of going toward: DEA raids on licensed medical cannabis dispensaries; state and federal prison population of non-violent drug offenders multiplied by $30k per prisoner; and toward militarized anti-drug operations at home and abroad, which have a way of smudging the lines and becoming dangerously close to military operations. So the above money could go toward other things. After all, it's not as if THIRTY YEARS of the drug war has really made much of a difference in anything other than us having less money, more people in prison, more racial discrimination, and pretty much the same amount of people trying drugs.
*note that this link is to a petition created by Nobel prize winning economist Milton Friedman and signed by hundreds of economists

Fifth, there would be billions of dollars earned by legalizing and taxing marijuana. There is no doubt in this. That money could go toward honest education programs, and toward drug (and alcohol) counseling. Instead of billions of dollars going toward armed drug cartels who are also bringing cocaine and heroin into our country, there would be a new sector of the economy. Compared to 700 billion dollars, it wouldn't be much, but then what does compare to 700 billion dollars, except for the entirety of the banking industry?

Sixth, even though it would help the economy, why should legalization/decriminalization be based on whether it would help grow the economy? Why make a decision such as this based on whether it would grow the economy when there are far more compelling reasons? For Christ's sake (and I do mean that literally), is the US now going to make ALL of its decisions based on whether there is money to be had? I DETEST that. I LOATHE that. I DESPISE that backward/myopic-principled way of thinking. It needs to be ushered to the exit door.

Seventh, here are some other reasons for decriminalization/legalization.
  • There really are people who are finding a variety of medical benefits from marijuana, and reliable studies have even verified this.
  • There are people whose lives are being destroyed, not by marijuana use directly, but by a penal system which follows biased and outdated ideologies, damning to jail those who use and distribute it.
  • Marijuana has been shown to be far less harmful to people than alcohol or tobacco, but those are legal, regulated, and (heavily) taxed. Simply put, that is double-think.
  • The drug war is class and race war -- blacks and latino/as are disproportionately represented among those who are put in prison (according to mandatory minimum sentences, even!) as a result of non-violent drug offenses.
  • Marijuana plants produce a lot of oxygen -- the planet needs more oxygen NOW, and these can grow a lot faster than forests (of course I would also recommend reforestation ASAP as well).
  • Finally, there is the issue of personal freedom to do as we choose. The United States has long been touted as "the land of the free." The war on drugs, coupled with peoples' continued desire to use them is a strong test against that notion -- because of prohibition, people are not free at all to use cannabis. Every argument I've heard from proponents for restriction on this freedom are either arbitrary or circular, frequently pointing to the illegality as the reason for itself.

Eighth, here are some things that hinder decriminalization/legalization, mainly corporate interests -- a few of which may have helped to get Obama into office. :(
  • The pharmaceutical industry doesn't want people to be able to grow their own pain relief.
  • If marijuana is legalized, there will be massive amounts of hemp fiber available for everything from clothing to rope, to sheets, to paper, to cooking oil, to insulation, to biodegradable plastics.
  • The tobacco, alcohol, and coffee industries don't want to have to give up their corner on the recreational drug market.
  • The prison and corrections industry has been enjoying a real boom lately, and the big box stores who hire prison labor at slavery wages also enjoy having locked-up non-violent drug offenders to help with their profit margins.** We, as shoppers, should take very careful heed of from where we buy our products.
  • Drug traffickers and dealers, despite the possibilities of getting caught, enjoy the immense profit they can make when they sell plants at 100x their natural cost to produce.
  • And V.P. Joe Biden and Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel have both been fairly well linked to -- and supportive of -- the war on drugs in the past.
My hope against hope, is that Obama, being the incredibly intelligent man that he is, is biding his time and waiting for the context to be ripe to introduce this. Decriminalization or legalization of marijuana is one of the many things that he needs to get done during his tenure in office. And if he is planning to wait until his second term to do this, it would certainly be a shame if he doesn't get re-elected, or ends up with a cantankerous Republican congress to deal in the future. The best time to do this is in the next two years.

*From http://www.whitehouse.gov/openforquestions, it appears that in 4 different categories, the questions about marijuana legalization were in the top ten most voted for the following constructed categories (I copy them here because information on the Internet has a way of vanishing overnight):

Health Care Reform (2 of top 10)

"Why is marijuana still illegal? Cigarettes and alcohol are far more harmful, and with the taxes put on the legal distribution of marijuana the US could make millions" Ben R, Washington, DC

"As a person with Multiple Sclerosis, I have many other MS friends who use marijuana just to feel some relief from their bodies. When can pressure be placed to reclassify Cannabis from a Schedule 1 drug (no medical benefit) to Schedule 5?" Marcia, Texas

Green Jobs and Energy (the top 2!)

""Will you consider decriminalizing the recreational/medical use of marijuana(hemp) so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it, and create millions of new jobs and a multi-billion dollar industry right here in the U.S.?”" Green Machine, Winchester,VA

"Has your administration given any serious thought to how legalizing marijuana could help solve the economic crisis? We could tax this green product and create an influx of cash while reducing violence created by the war of drugs & illegal trafficking" Ashley, Brooklyn, NY

Financial Stability (the top 4!)

"Would you support the bill currently going through the California legislation to legalize and tax marijuana, boosting the economy and reducing drug cartel related violence?" Anthony, Warrington, PA

"Has the administration given any thought to legalizing marijuana, as a cash crop to fuel the economy? Why not make available, regulate, and tax something that that about 10 million Americans use regularly and is less harmful than tobacco or alcohol." Sarah, Atlanta, GA

"Growing up I have noticed many around me always talk about legalization of marijuana, and I always thought, why not put a tax stamp on it. If marijuana was legalized it could really change a lot of things. America had the same problem with Alcohol." Peter McNamara, Minneapolis, MN

"Could legalizing marijuana and laying a tax on it, given restriction allow the government make back some of the glaring debt considering it's inelasticity and the history of economics of prohibition?" Andy Drake, New Brunswick, NJ

Jobs (2 of the top ten)

"What are your plans for the failing, "War on Drugs", thats sucking money from tax payers and putting non-violent people in prison longer than the violent criminals?" Matt B, West Bend, WI

"President Obama, Do you plan on letting Science end the failed "War" on Marijuana for personal and medical use thus taking the strain of our prisons and police forces so that we no longer have to arrest over 800,000 non violent drug offenders?" Phill, Georgetown,MA

Budget (the top 7!)

"With over 1 out of 30 Americans controlled by the penal system, why not legalize, control, and tax marijuana to change the failed war on drugs into a money making, money saving boost to the economy? Do we really need that many victimless criminals?" Ryan Palmer, Dallas, TX

"Mr. Obama, Thank you for allowing us to ask our questions to you, unfiltered. What is your stance on legalizing marijuana federally, taxing it and regulating much like alcohol and tobacco? I believe that the Drug War has failed, and needs overhaul." Brian, Minneapolis, MN

"I am not a marijuana user, but I do believe that making marijuana legal could provide some relief as to it could be heavily taxed and regulated. Legalization of marijuana will also be a detriment to the drug cartels in Latin America." Ryan McLaughlin, Rindge, NH / Quakertown, PA

"Have you considered legalizing marijuana and taxing/regulating it like alcohol? Marijuana is America's largest cash crop. The tax revenue from marijuana sales would provide a massive source of new revenue and cut the insane costs of the "Drug War."" Matt S, Huntsville, AL

"Mr. President, we the people continue to ask you this general question, please do not fail to respond: Will you allow science and common sense to reign and end this failed WAR ON DRUGS starting with the legalization and taxation of Marijuana?" Mark B, Sterling,VA

"Should the recreational use of marijuana be legalized and taxed if it will help California reduce its budget deficit? How will you and the federal government respond if such a law is passed by the California legislature?" JHawk, Santa Barbara, CA

"Are you willing to seriously consider the idea of curtailing the failed & expensive drug war in favor of a fair, responsible policy of decriminalization? With Mexican gangs, drug-related disease, & addicition going unchecked we need another solution." T.Kapanka, San Francisco, CA

That's a lot of questions (17 out of the top 110 questions), and I imagine that they got spread out across all of those categories because among the available categories, none of them seemed to jump out easily a social policy reform, or prison reform, or marijuana reform. Funny how lack of a category for something can be a form of inhibiting conversation about it, or making it seem awkwardly shoe-horned in. In retrospect, it's no wonder that the economic angle is where the question was built on that Obama chose to answer. After reading all these questions, I find it so sad that he ended up simply answering, "No," and it really is kind of infuriating that he was so cavalier and jocular about it.


**Here's an interesting/mortifying tidbit regarding humanity's propensity to enforce slave labor that I learned in a book I am reading for my Prisons and Punishment class (from page 39) -- "In the South, after the Civil War, former slaves were sentenced to prison and then leased out by the prison to work for local plantation owners."


lyrics: "I think you missed the point! Arresting for a joint?"
-F***king Hostile, by Pantera

colors: Red, White, Blue, Green

mood: Sleepy

chant/prayer/mantra: May the world get back to nature one day. And not the hard way.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel


Edit on March 29, 2009: Several people have stepped up and spoken out against Barack Obama's flippancy on the answer, including this heart-rending case study and this real-life case study about how serious marijuana legalization is as an issue, regarding medical treatment. In this post, the question is posed as to why Cannabis is still listed as a schedule one drug, when all indications are that it should be listed in a less dangerous class (in other words, it does not have a high potential for abuse, it is considered medically significant in several states, and 'safety for medical use' is not an issue), and recommends that the Attorney General could do so immediately.

And this question directed at Presidents Clinton, Bush, and Obama, all three of whom have admitted to using drugs in the past and were not give the same treatment as the victims in the war on drugs. And there's this post by Dan Sweeney, where he makes some cogent arguments parallel to mine, but perhaps more focused and better worded.

And here is the Obama administration's earlier response to questions on the Internet about marijuana legalization: On 12/15/08, "President-elect Obama is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana." What exactly does that mean? It means that they crafted that answer specifically not to say that he is opposed to it. It also does not say that he is not in favor of the currently criminalized state of marijuana, and it also does not say whether or not he is in favor of decriminalization of marijuana. A subtle difference, but if we recall the context of Washington politics, one of our recent past presidents tried to redefine the meaning of "is," and another tried to redefine the meaning of "mission accomplished," so something like this wouldn't be out of the ken of possibility.

Also, Nirvana's Krist Novoselic weighed in on the co-op model used for cannabis clubs, and how a similar model could be used for health care. Good job thinking outside the box there.

It's interesting to note that in 1972, the editors for Consumer Reports magazine did a wide review of histories and effects of various drugs, including Cannabis.

And to close, here's a beauty from Italy. A lonesome shepherd should be allowed marijuana for personal use, because he's out in nature all alone with his sheep.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,


Monday, March 23, 2009

 

Immigrants being held in privately run detention facilities

Our country puts people in prison to work for pennies on the dollar. It helps the privately run prisons turn a profit. Please view this map, and article attached to it for more information.

I'm glad this issue is getting coverage by the New York Times.

Here's a quote from the article: "....an industry that detains half a million people a year, up from a few thousand just 15 years ago. The system operates without the rules that protect criminal suspects, and has grown up with little oversight, often in the backyards of communities desperate for any source of money and work."

pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

Labels: , , ,


Friday, February 6, 2009

 

Michael Phelps caught smoking from a bong

So uber-champion of swimming Michael Phelps had a picture of him smoking from a bong end up in a newspaper. And now lots of his sponsors are dropping his contract, including Kellogg's and Subway -- corporations which enjoy business from people who smoke marijuana. Perhaps they and the other folks trying to slap his wrist really are doing it because he should be a role model for kids, perhaps they're doing it because they don't want to be associated with marijuana because of family-goodness perceptions they want to keep alive.

There is a lot I would add to this discussion, but apparently, there are many professional journalists saying pretty much the same thing. Note a few of the headlines of the Related Blogs section from the page linked above (I will add my comments in []'s):

The simple way of saying this is that the context is being presented as if Michael Phelps spending some of his downtime in an altered state of consciousness cannot be allowed as a part of our worldview. For Christ's sake -- and I do mean that literally -- shaman and spiritual guides have been smoking and snorting herbs and such for thousands of years. When can we get real about drug policy, and get real about having a system of laws based on a deep and grounded ethical morality, and put people (and the planet) before ideologies?


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

Labels: , , , , , , , ,


Monday, February 2, 2009

 

Bagholders Unite!!

OK, I'm really not much of an organizer, but I just had an idea, and I hope an organizer picks up on this one. I have been reflecting on the nature of labor, investment, and reward in the U.S. culture, and have come up with this. The people who do the work get the least reward. The people who own the resources upon/with which the workers work get first dibs on the reward.

That is nothing new, and it takes a fool not to notice that. That is not the idea I am speaking of.

The idea I am speaking of is the direct application of the above when it comes to today's situation. It comes from seeing what happened with Enron, and seeing what happened with that Madoff guy recently and his execution of the latest Ponzi/pyramid scheme. With the U.S. government pouring tons of borrowed/taxed dollars into banks and such, where it is not fully accountable and being siphoned off, the government is looking to be the greater fool.

And ultimately, that leaves the people holding the bag. The taxes we paid, and the money borrowed that we will have to pay to God knows who, are being invested in the pockets of pillagers. These pillagers include those at the top/inside/beginning of the stock market game, and the CEO's still receiving exorbitant sums, after their companies received a part of the $700 billion bank bailout.

In short, any government money that is being borrowed from the future, and not being invested in our future -- in the infrastructures of:
Any money being invested elsewhere, further afield than that related to our real well-being, and the people who are putting it there are criminal. We the common citizens of the U.S. will be left holding the bag, without real investment in our country's future, while the folks in the Senate with a country club sensibility and nary a clue of what it's like to be out in the cold, and those with the tightest connections -- they will be (are) the first to cash in on the economy as the true value of this U.S. company becomes more clear. With our tax dollars ending up in somebody's pockets, it will be really difficult to get it back.

We the people had our money invested over the last eight years (and many prior) by "mutual fund managers" who did not have our interests in mind, or had the singular interest of maximizing money, not in responsible investment. When their investments failed because of unsane monetary policies such as the outrageous overextended ratio allowed (or unregulated) for fractional-reserve banking newly-constructed credit default swap market, the investment (put into things that had low value anyway) has gone sour.

One REAL rule for investors: Put your money in things that you want to see saved/thrive. It's not difficult. It's only difficult if you treat investments as if it's gambling. Put your money in what needs to thrive, and you will see it pay you back in ways well beyond those seen in dividends, stock options and monetary ROI's.



lyrics: No his mind is not for rent to any god or government.
-Tom Sawyer, by Rush

colors: green, as in money. and green, as in environment.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

Labels: , , , , , , ,


Thursday, January 29, 2009

 

A couple gifts of presence

These are two pieces of art that I gifted to some people from the chaplaincy internship I experienced at a mental health / incarceration facility this summer.

Angel Slacks was a gift to one of the employees who had never heard of slack before, and was incredibly bogged down because of it.



Ecstatic Peace was a gift to the people on the unit I was working at, because knowing that I would be leaving, I wouldn't be able be present in the same way, but still wanted them to remember I'd be there.



lyrics:
My God is good in the kitchen
Make a good meal from bread and fishes

Feed the hungry pour the wine

Everybodys welcome to have a good time

Sit at his table enjoy the food
from "Save Us All" by Tracy Chapman

or

Gee angel, gee angel, I need some slack
There's nothing in this world that I'd rather do

Than buy a set of wings and fly away with you

from "Gee Angel" by Sugar

chant/prayer/mantra: May we be always with love, and love always with us.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

Labels: , , ,


Sunday, November 16, 2008

 

Prop 8: Too Narrow a Focus

This evening I read a few different posts by people I've only recently become acquainted with, or know through other people.

It has come to my attention that there are people in the LGBT community who are pointing fingers of blame at communities of color, notably black folks, because there was a tendency among black and latino voters to vote yes on prop 8.  Note that neither of these communities are monoliths, just as not all white people are John McCain or John Kerry supporters.  

We really need to come together.  REALLY.  There is not time to wait on this.  We've got to get together, and sit at the table and stay at the table.  This includes those in the GLBT community, the black and Latino communities, women, anybody else who has experienced oppression, and allies of all stripes.  My hope is that this present animosity is the beginning of a dialog that needs to happen.  And I am hoping through communities coming together, this dialog can ride the fast track.

The media and the advertising, and the coordinated Yes on 8 effort by Mormons and the Catholic church are nearer to the root of this problem.  And the problem has many roots, certainly.  There are bigots in California, and in America.  Bigoted by race, by sexual identity, sexual affinity, and many other dimensions.  And there are people who were bamboozled by too many ads, or voted according to the way their church told them.  I highly doubt that there were many people of color who voted out of spite or to "spread the oppression around."  At the very least, that is cutting off one's nose to spite one's own face, since the LGBT community intersects with every culture in America (though some cultures try harder to push it back into the closet).

Here's an interesting thing: Among all the press coverage that prop 8 has gotten, does anybody know how Prop 9 turned out?  Well, it passed.   Prop 9 is one of those "get tough on crime" things that means a lot of money (from a fairly dry pool in CA) is going to go toward the prison system.  As a person who speaks out on behalf of marginalized people in the prison system (many of whom are of color), I wonder why this hasn't received as much attention as Prop 8?

lyrics: "And as she turns the volume down, he's getting smaller with the sound..." Angie Baby, by Helen Reddy

colors: Get it together.

mood: Tired, distracted.

chant/prayer/mantra: For peace, and divine connection between us all.  Amen.


pax hominibus,
agape to all,
joel

Labels: , , , , ,


Monday, July 28, 2008

 

Way too much to blog on, and I'm way too low on time and energy

If I had the energy, I would be blogging on:

1. Senator Obama's recent resounding speech in Berlin, coupled with the ColorOfChange.org's petition to Fox News (rejected, BTW) to stop being racist. And Fox News' new ploy to call MoveOn.org (related somehow to ColorOfChange.org) 'the new Klan'. Buh??????? As a person who majored in psychology, I will ask, "Project much?"

2. How awesome is it that Texas is plunking down several billion dollars to connect wind energy to the electrical grid, and hopefully other stuff? And also, that GM is pushing to get electrical charging infrastructure set up in many communities around the country, in support of the 2010 release of their electric hybrid car called Volt? (Though big demerits to them for trying to be proprietary about it, and wanting to charge an extra $500 for electric vehicles produced by other companies to get a converter.)

3. The ongoing "trickle down" theory going on with respect to the housing loan travesty. The assumption by those advocates is that by bailing out the big centralized banks, it will somehow help the end user. Sheesh! And with the method of the bailout being related to tax dollars propping up Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, we are finally seeing the black hole that will consume the U.S. economy. This stands to be a very painful event horizon, and I am afraid our nation's economic might has been badly wounded by the Bush Administration's borrow and spend policies (News today: $482 Billion deficit predicted for 2009).

4. My ongoing experience working at a state mental health facility this summer. It has been intense, and deeply instructional. I am seeing mental illness, and spiritual illness, in a whole new light. At the same time, it has been devastating hearing the stories and seeing the conditions of some of the people there, as a result of parents and family, organic brain damage, religiously-based delusions (that run along a continuum), drug abuse, abandonment, stress, and a system that doesn't have the political will to deal properly with mental illness. Along with the prison system, our mental health system could use a lot more support, and some serious reform, bordering on abolition, because our current system is very much still punitive and not designed to be restorative. I'm not happy to say that the prison system sees minimum sentencing laws and recidivism as good for business. I'm also not happy to say that the prison business is not good for the inmates, the correctional officers, or the communities with prisons.

5. The big thing to comment on, that I can barely begin is the hostile shooting with a shotgun at a UU church in Tennessee, by a man who was upset about not having a job, and blaming the "liberals and the gays." This, shortly after the supreme court took the time out to further validate the second amendment. I can't even begin, other than to pray for healing. Healing for everyone involved. Healing of the whole. When I heard that it was an usher who jumped in front of the gunman who was one of the ones who died, it finally brought me to tears.

When time allows, I hope to do a bit more research and reflection and get a bit more detailed on all this.

lyrics:
"Time to bring it down again.
Don't just call me pessimist.
Try and read between the lines.
I can't imagine why you wouldn't
Welcome any change, my friend."
-Aenima, by Tool

colors: light brown, the color worn by all of the "Individuals" in the "Secure Treatment Area" (behind the razor wire fence and multi-port gate) at Napa State Hospital.

mood: soul tired

chant/prayer/mantra: May the people of this world, and of this world's religions, and this world's politics, and the world's cultures, come together and be made whole, and allow for authenticity without harm or intentional transgression. And may there be grace. Amen.


pax hominibus, (for now and the future)
agape to all,
joel

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

free page hit counter