Tuesday, January 13, 2009
The Case for Marijuana Legalization: Food & Medicine*
Indeed, cannabis was one of the best known and most widely used medicinal plants, in many parts of the world, for more than 3500 years. In U.S. pharmacopoeia, cannabis was the primary medicine prescribed to treat more than 100 illnesses or diseases until 1937, when growing hemp in the U.S. was effectively banned.
Among the therapeutic uses of cannabis are treatments for asthma, glaucoma, epilepsy, nausea, multiple sclerosis, tumors, arthritis, rheumatism, cystic fibrosis, herpes, back pain, muscle spasms, insomnia, stress, migraine headaches, anorexia, depression, and many others.
A healthy diet equates to a healthy immune system. Were hemp seed, a highly nutritious and easily digestible source of protein, essential amino acids and omega-3 fatty acids incorporated into the typical diet, the number of occurrences of the aforementioned illnesses and diseases would plummet.
Be advised that cannabis is not a panacea. Different people sometimes obtain different results and a small percentage experience allergic reactions. People who experience adverse reactions shouldn't use cannabis, but that's not to say that no one should use it. Lots of people are allergic to some things, some people are allergic to lots of things, but it just doesn't follow that because a small percentage of people are allergic to peanuts or hemp, peanuts and hemp should be off-limits to everyone.
It's worth noting that adverse reactions to cannabis are generally mild and no known deaths have occurred due to liver or kidney failure, or to overdose. If only the same could be said for aspirin and Tylenol.
The U.S. Government continues to spread misinformation, disinformation, negative propaganda and outright undisguised lies about cannabis hemp to the citizens it governs. It's a thinly veiled ploy to maintain hemp's illegal status for the benefit of vested pharmaceutical interests at the expense of the people who could most benefit from easy access to legalized hemp and its many medicinal and nutritional properties.
In 1937, the year that cannabis became illegal, one ounce of medicinal cannabis sold for $1 at local pharmacies all across the nation. Today, one ounce of kick-ass bud typically sells for $300 – $400 on the black market, no prescription needed. Obviously, legalized hemp would lower the cost of most other therapeutic drugs, and go a long way toward making healthcare affordable for everyone.
Anti-marijuana forces have used specious, disingenuous arguments to make their case against marijuana since day one. When one weighs all the facts about cannabis honestly, the moral and ethical concerns of marijuana legalization line up on the side of legalization.
When people finally shed their fear and ignorance of cannabis, they will vote to legalize it. When they finally see and experience the benefits to be had, they will wonder why it took so long.
Why, indeed!
When the people lead, politicians will follow.
*This brief article originally appeared in Petey's Pipeline E-zine, Issue #34, July 3, 2006
Register your vote for cannabis legalization, today. Visit Change.org/ for more information.
Labels: cannabis hemp, drug war, hemp, marijuana, medical marijuana, nutrition
Wednesday, December 24, 2008
How Much is Enough?
Here’s a couple of interesting items, which I shamelessly lifted from the Too Much Web site. Perhaps you’ll find them interesting, too.
Stat of the Week:
How could U.S. income inequality be undone? Larry Summers, Barack Obama's pick to lead the National Economic Council, has worked out the math. If every top 1 percent household — average income: $1.7 million — wrote a check for $800,000, and if all these checks were pooled together, then $10,000 could be sent to every U.S. household making under $120,000 — and Americans would be as economically equal, by income, as they were three decades ago.
“America’s wealthy have benefitted more than anyone else from the stability and safety provided by government, as well as the infrastructure and educated workforce and countless other public goods that make commerce possible. It is entirely fair to ask more from these families than we do from families who are struggling.”—Citizens for Tax Justice, Principles for Progressive Taxation During a Recession, December 2008
Ponder these while the U.S. economy continues its death spiral.
Labels: economic equality, progressive taxation, recession, wealth
Tuesday, December 09, 2008
Bailout Blues
Congress did right by denying $25 billion in bailout money to U.S. automakers unless they presented rescue plans detailing how the money would be spent. (Too bad lawmakers didn’t hold Wall Street to the same high standards before approving $700 billion to shore up financial institutions that were finally experiencing the consequences of their own unethical practices and rampant greed.)
Properly chastised for showing up on Capitol Hill (or Capital Hill—from the CEOs’ perspective, either term applies) in their corporate jets, the Big Three’s CEOs failed to make their case and went away empty-handed. A few days later, they were back, this time riding in on the latest in American automotive hybrid technology. Once again, they pitched their case, only this time the price for their bailout had risen from $25 billion to $34 billion. Once again, they were rebuffed. Now, it seems that the Big Three are about to get a bailout package, after all, but significantly less than they’d asked for and under conditions that have real teeth.
It’s increasingly hard to justify saving Detroit’s Big Three when they’ve done little more than churn out crappy products for more than 60 years. The U.S. auto industry chose to ignore numerous warnings from numerous sources, instead hitting the snooze button at every wake-up call. Making business decisions based on what’s good for investors during the current quarter and possibly the next while steadfastly ignoring the necessity of making long-range plans to ensure long-term profitability is not a strategy for long-term success.
Instead of heeding Alvin Toffler’s prophecies (Future Shock, 1970; The Third Wave, 1980; Powershift, 1990) regarding sweeping changes about to overtake entire societies, economies, and governments, the Big Three pursued about-to-become-extinct technology while Toyota, Honda, Tesla and Karma (among others) got the jump on them.
While tempting, letting the Big Three fail is not something we should seriously consider. Too many other businesses and industries are tied directly or indirectly to U.S. automakers; allowing the Big Three to fail would impact these and send a ripple effect across the broader economy, ultimately costing taxpayers many times more than the amounts proposed for an initial bailout package.
However, any bailout money forthcoming should have some serious strings attached. Without incentives, corporate CEOs have no reason to change and past bad management practices will continue. Government, rather than making cash loans or gifts to the Big Three, should buy up all the common stock in those companies, nationalize them, kick the CEOs out of their corporate jets (sans golden parachutes), hire new managers, redefine corporate missions and rewrite corporate charters, and chart a new course for each company that best reflects the changing dynamics of 21st –century reality as dictated by environmental, economic, demographic, societal, sustainability and peak oil considerations.
When profitability has been restored—and surely it will be—government should divest itself of ownership in these companies and invest ownership in the people who actually manufacture the tangible products. When workers have an ownership interest in the companies they work for, they tend to be happier, more satisfied, more stable and more productive. Everyone wins.
To do nothing to save the Big Three automakers from total collapse would be irresponsible; some 3 million jobs ultimately hang in the balance. But more stilted 20th-century thinking is not the answer, either. That’s precisely what brought the economy to its knees to begin with.
What we need now are radical new paradigms for economic survival, environmental sustainability, and social equity. We need brilliant minds and bold visionaries to show us the way. We need wise and selfless leaders to take us there. But most of all we need the collective will to make it happen.
Labels: automakers, Big Three, Capitol Hill, Congress, Detroit, government bailouts, Wall Street
Friday, November 07, 2008
Bold Career Move
As a political candidate, Sarah Palin bombed. But she comported herself admirably on SNL, and that leads me to believe that she could begin a successful new career in show business. After apprenticing as Tina Fey’s stunt double, she could segue into the title role in The Tina Fey Story. From there, she could transition into a daytime soap opera about a lunatic bitch with political aspirations, from which she could retire in relative obscurity (hmmm, Whoopie Goldberg’s movie, The Telephone, springs immediately to mind).
Labels: Sarah Palin, Tina Fey, Whoopie Goldberg
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
About Last Night
The long nightmare is almost over. Last night, the Obama juggernaut blew the doors off the Straight Talk Express. No surprise there; it was obvious to anyone who was paying attention that the wheels had come off that bus long before it ever left the depot.
Last night, Senator Barack Obama became President-elect of the United States of America.
Last night, Senator John McCain delivered what was probably the finest speech of his political career.
Last night, our nation took its first tentative steps into the 21st century.
Last night delivered hope for a better future.
At this time I’d like to extend my sincere congratulations to the Obama campaign team for a hard-won victory, and to express my best wishes to Obama for much good luck and many successes. He’s going to need an abundance of both to erase the ill effects of eight years of the Bush League’s bad decisions and failed policies.
And for those of you who were disappointed or outraged by the election results—especially if you cringe at the mention of the name Barack Hussein Obama—repeat after me: Barry “who’s sane” O’Bama, Barry “who’s sane” O’Bama, Barry “who’s sane” O’Bama.
Chant it like a mantra for the rest of the day. By tomorrow, he’ll seem just like reg’lar folks, and you’ll begin to realize how fortunate the nation is to have this exceptional man as our next President.
As I said at the beginning, the long nightmare is almost over. Now, let the dreaming begin.
Labels: Barak Obama, John McCain, President-elect, Straight Talk Express
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
Election Selection
Color played a big role in who I voted for in this election. No, it’s not what you think. Let me explain.
Not race nor skin color nor ethnicity had a part in helping me decide which candidates to vote for. The contenders could all be purple with orange polka-dots and green racing stripes for all I care. The important thing for a candidate to earn my vote is to share my ideals and represent my interests.
Although Obama is a better choice for President than McCain (and I fully expect him to win the Presidency by a decisive margin), I voted for Cynthia McKinney. And that’s where color enters the picture; she’s got the “green” racing stripes.
Labels: Barak Obama, Cynthia McKinney, John McCain
Friday, October 31, 2008
Random Thoughts on Candidates McCain and Palin
It was obvious on SNL that Tina Fey does Sarah Palin better than Sarah Palin. When Palin does Palin, it comes across as an imperfect imitation of Tina Fey imitating Sarah Palin; Tina Fey owns Sarah Palin.
At this point I’m thinking that it’s probably no mere coincidence that the only difference between “Palin” and “Pain” is the presence or absence of the letter “l.” Nor is there a high probability of coincidence that “McCain” becomes “McPain” simply by swapping out the “C” for a “P.” You can see where I’m going with this. (Because I’m writing this on a PC, I’ll offer it up as further proof that all things are in some way connected.)
So, what does all this pain have to do with a McCain/Palin Presidency/Vice Presidency? Oh, my brothers and sisters, have you not been paying attention these past eight years? McCain and Palin are a toxic combination representing the status quo; this duhnamic duo would compound the problems engineered by Bush and Company and bring unimaginable, unendurable and unprecedented pain upon America and a large majority of her citizens for many years into the future—if we’re fortunate enough to even have a future.
Is Sarah Palin Greg Stillson in drag? I can’t say for sure, but whenever I see her give a speech as a Vice-Presidential candidate, I’m reminded of the character (a Congressional candidate with aspirations of one day running for President) from Stephen King’s novel The Dead Zone, and of the same dark vision of the country as seen by Johnny Smith.
Neither of these disingenuous tools of the NeoCon spin machine are what they claim to be. John consistently and persistently misrepresents himself as a war hero (he was not) and Sarah consistently and persistently overstates her qualifications to hold a high-level position in public office. And both of these unscrupulous candidates shamelessly smear Barack Obama with a barrage of half-truths and lies, diminishing themselves in the process.
Remember the Savings & Loan scandal that left taxpayers on the hook for $billions? Remember Charles Keating and the Keating Five? Without John McCain, it would have been the Keating Four.
McCain berates Obama for lacking judgment, but how much judgment did McCain show by selecting Palin as his running mate? No, I don’t mean as helping or hurting his chances for election, I mean as how it might affect the country if he’s elected, dies while in office (considering his age and his health history—not to mention his undisclosed health records—there’s a good chance of that happening), and Sarah ascends to the Presidency. Is Sarah ready to lead? Not even close.
She lacks experience and/or expertise in all the critical areas that define a world-class leader. She has no military experience, lacks significant foreign policy experience, and her diplomatic skills leave much to be desired. Despite being a self-proclaimed energy expert, she has no energy policy other than “Drill, baby, drill.” Her answer to global warming and its environmental consequences is to ignore them or, worse, deny them. And where are her plans for addressing the other problems—all tough challenges, to be sure—facing Americans in the immediate future; crumbling infrastructure, universal healthcare, economic instability, the national debt, the failures of public education, looming food and water crises, national security, wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and numerous others? Sending Ms. Palin in to do a competent persons job would be like sending in a person to oversee U.S. Military operations in the Middle East based on prior experience as a Boy Scout troop leader. To put it succinctly, it mustn’t happen.
No doubt Sarah set the bar to qualify for public office too low. By her standards, even I am qualified to hold the office of President or Vice-President of the U.S.
Just for the hell of it, and to prove to you how empty and meaningless all these claims made in the name of political self-aggrandizement really are, let’s compare my qualifications to hold the office of Vice President (or President) with Sarah Palin’s.
Military Experience
An ability to make sound military decisions is essential to the person who, as President, is also the Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of the United States. Lacking actual military experience or a War College education, a minimum requirement would be to have read Sun Tsu’s The Art of War.
Whereas Sarah visited a military base in Kuwait, I’ve resided on several military bases in the U.S., MCRD San Diego, Camp Pendleton, and Twenty-nine Palms among them, and served TD at several others. As a civilian truck driver I delivered loads of strategic materials to other military bases, including McCord AFB, Fort Lewis, El Toro MAS, and Nellis AFB. Although I missed pulling duty in Viet Nam by luck-of-the-draw, any way you want to slice and dice it, my military experience trumps Palin’s. Oh, yeah, and I’ve read Sun Tsu’s The Art of War.
Foreign Policy Experience
Sarah “High-heel Hitler” Palin cites Alaska’s proximity to Russia—and her ability to see Russia from Alaska if she stands at exactly the right spot at the right time of day and the right time of year—as a substantial part of her foreign policy experience. She also thinks that a brief refueling stop in Ireland counts as foreign policy experience, as well. Real stretches of the imagination, any way you want to pull them. And I’m not absolutely sure if meeting with U.S. troops in Kuwait counts as foreign policy experience, either; I’ll guess that it doesn’t.
Sarah might be able to see Russia under ideal conditions, but I can find Russia on a world map. Sarah had a brief refueling stop in Shannon, Ireland, on her way to visiting a U.S. Military base in Kuwait; I’ve refueled at truck stops, most of which sell fuel refined from foreign-supplied oil sold on the international market, all across the country.
According to Sarah’s twisted logic, any connection at all to the term international is enough to qualify someone for the office of Vice President. But if that’s the case, then I must be overqualified by virtue of my résumé of connections to the term. In various past lives I hauled container-loads of hay cubes bound for Japan (an international market) for Viking International driving an International truck; while in the military I performed preventive maintenance on International Harvester heavy equipment (TD-18s, TD-24s); I’ve flown out of and into Portland International Airport, raced at Portland International Raceway, and eaten at International House of Pancakes. I’ve even been known to use IBM (International Business Machines) office equipment.
Despite all of this International experience, I’m still hard-pressed to make a rational argument, on that basis alone, that I’m qualified to hold high public office. And (on that basis alone) Sarah’s no better positioned to make a rational argument for qualification than I am.
Foreign Trade
Governor Palin boasts about a $40 billion pipeline to carry natural gas from Alaska’s North Slope to Alberta, Canada, and points beyond as if it were a done deal. It’s not. On the downside, an AP investigation uncovered a rigged bidding process that threw the construction contract to TransCanada Corp., a company with close ties to Palin’s pipeline team. Before construction can begin, TransCanada must skirt some major financial barriers and regulatory impediments; the project’s completion is years away. Still, I guess you can chalk this up as foreign trade experience for Palin.
My own foreign trade experience is far less grandiose than Sarah’s, but the sheer amount of it dwarf’s hers in comparison. For seven-and-a-half years during the mid-eighties and early nineties, I conducted international trade missions to Canada (Vancouver, B.C. and neighboring towns and cities), making twice-weekly deliveries of critical commodities (snack pies and other bakery products) to pre-established distribution centers. As a result of this experience I mastered one of two Canadian languages, which I now speak and write fluently. Put another checkmark in the plus column for me.
Prior to that I participated in two covert missions into Mexico (Tijuana, Ciudad Juarez) to randomly sample various ethanol-containing products commonly sold on the open market, and to stimulate the local economy. The aforementioned incursions into the territories of a sovereign foreign nation qualified as hazardous duty; indeed, I came away from each suffering severe short-term brain trauma, from which I recovered in less than 24 hours (yet another testament to my endurance, resiliency and tenacity—all desired characteristics of a leader).
Once again, my experience (depending on how you spin it) eclipses Sarah Palin’s.
Leadership Experience
For leadership experience, Sarah cites (in part) her two terms as mayor of Wasilla, Alaska, and the role she played in directing the daily machinations of that town of fewer than 10,000 people. By the end of her terms, conservative Mayor Palin increased the tax burden on each of Wasilla’s taxpaying citizens by more than 30% and left the town more than $20 million in debt.
Although I’ve never been mayor, as a construction flagger I directed traffic on a street improvement project in a city with three times the population, which I would argue is the more challenging job because survival is not about getting reelected at the end of your term but about staying alive ’til the end of the day.
Although I’ve never lead anything larger than a grade school assembly, I live in a city whose metropolitan area has a population roughly twice as large as Alaska’s. Whether you lead or are led, the larger the population the greater your responsibility.
Sarah also trumpets her two-year experience as Governor of Alaska, the nation’s largest state, as proof that she’s Presidential material. But what does this claim really mean? Not much, really. Really! Alaska, at more than twice the size of Texas, has the fourth smallest population of all the states, and it accounts for less than ¼ of 1% of the nation’s total population. Someone should tell Sarah that governing is not about the number of square miles that lie within the borders of one’s realm, but the number of people. (It’s people that need governing; the land, in the absence of people, takes care of itself.)
If you can believe the information posted on her official Web site, some of Sarah’s most recent important accomplishments as governor of Alaska include appointing or reappointing people to various positions within her administration, the ceremonial lowering of the flag in honor of a deceased retired judge, and bitching about the protections afforded endangered Beluga whales in Cook Inlet—not exactly the kinds of stuff that make great Presidents or VPs.
As you can see, my experience in every category equals or exceeds that of Governor Palin. Am I qualified? Is Sarah Palin? So go ahead, vote for me as a write-in candidate for Vice President. True, there’s not much chance of me winning, but I have my resignation letter already prepared just in case.
Labels: Charles Keating, foreign policy, foreign trade, John McCain, Sarah Palin, Stephen King, Sun Tzu, The Dead Zone, the Keating Five, Tina Fey, U.S. Presidency
