There are many forms of political corruption, and some are worse than others. Ordinary corruption might be when an office holder, in return for some consideration, awards a government contract to a specific contractor. Or when a legislator includes a line or two of text in a bill that creates a tax break or regulatory loophole for a supporter's business.
Then there is systemic corruption, where the law itself is corrupted by a corrupt society, as in the racist laws the Democratic Party wrote and upheld from the time of its founding by Andrew Jackson until the laws were finally changed in the late 1960s.
Money from black market profiteering has an ancient role in corrupting governments. In the last century the key black market has been in illegal drugs. A vast framework of corrupt police and politicians have been fueled by drug money, including here in California.
You can tell which politicians are corrupt by their stands on efforts to legalize these drugs. We supposedly live in a democracy. People want drugs for fun, for energy, for relief from pain. Sure people injure themselves with meth and heroin and other drugs, but it is highly obvious that the bans on these drugs just make them highly profitable.
Most drug-associated crime is because the drugs are artificially expensive because of the costs of running a black market, evading law enforcement and fighting other groups for business. So besides the criminal enterprises that manufacturer and distribute the drugs, the main beneficiaries are political machines like the Democratic Party and Republican Party.
When a politician is against legalizing marijuana, he or she is just protecting the black market rackets of their racketeer friends, and their own "juice."
Lately the top two political figures in the State of California, Governor Jerry Brown and U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein, have spoken against legalizing marijuana (beyond the current legal status of "medical" marijuana.) Governor Brown asked "How many people can get stoned and still have a great state or a great nation?" The kind of nation that can topple 3rd world governments at will, keep the wages for most workers artificially low, and make sure that every poor boy and girl can look forward to a life of selling illegal narcotics.
Diane Feinstein has been politically bullet-proof since most women in California decided to vote for Democratic Party female candidates without looking beyond the issue of reproductive rights. She recently came to Brown's rescue, saying "I saw a lot of where people began with marijuana and went on to hard drugs." Some people start as relatively harmless city council members and go on to become Senators, but does that mean we should abolish city councils?
The depths of Feinstein's corruption and misgovernance are difficult for the average Californian voter to fathom. Unfortunately, the corrupt two-party system in California means her only serious electoral opposition has been from Republican Senatorial candidates who are also anti-drug.
What distinguishes Feinstein is she has a voting record in Congress. She apparently hates animals. She was the co-sponsor in the Senate of the Animal Enterprise Terrorism Act, which makes anyone protesting cruelty to animals a terrorist.
She hates Palestinians, as shown by her constant, vocal support for U.S. taxpayer subsidies for Israeli ethnic cleansing in Palestine. Many California Democrats who think the U.S. wastes a lot of money on war would be surprised at how Feinstein has consistently supported inflating the homeland security and "defense" budgets.
Senator Feinstein's husband is Richard C. Blum, a capitalist, investment banker, and real-estate tycoon (he owns much of San Francisco). There we have at least the appearance of ordinary corruption. One of Blum's many holdings EG&G won a $600 million contract from the U.S. military. Because he is so wealthy he also controls or helps control a number of prestigious non-for-profit (but run by profiteers) groups, notably The Wilderness Society.
There is probably nothing to be done about Senator Feinstein except to wait for her to die from old age. However, California voters will likely have a chance to legalize marijuana in a future referendum.
Illegal drugs generate vast sums of money that corrupt society and our political structure. Because of black-market drugs sales in the U.S., Mexico has become a drug lord's playground. Did no one learn any lessons from the U.S. experiment with alcohol Prohibition?
When you hear a politician tell you marijuana should be illegal, remember they are on the take. When they ask to be re-elected, just say no.
Disclosure: I don't smoke marijuana (but I did when I was younger).
Showing posts with label marijuana. Show all posts
Showing posts with label marijuana. Show all posts
Monday, March 31, 2014
Friday, August 30, 2013
Bombing Syria, War Crimes, and Marijuana Priorities
Politics is first of all about lying, followed by deceit, then corruption, with the public good seldom coming in better than fourth in the list of politicians' priorities.
Two seemingly unconnected events happened this week. The Obama administration (but not Obama himself) announced it would issue instructions to federal officers and prosecutors that set new priorities for the federal enforcement of marijuana laws. This is largely the result of 21 states (if you include the city of D.C.) having legalized medical marijuana, with two, Washington State and Colorado having also legalized recreational marijuana.
It took Barack Obama only six years to figure this out. The preponderance of voters are now for marijuana legalization, and the Democratic Party has been taking a lot of heat on the issue for years. The new priorities for busting people are: when the weed crosses state lines; when it is sold or given to minors; when the proceeds are used to fund other criminal enterprises; when the entrepreneurs have not made donations to the Democratic Party. In theory at least medical marijuana gets a pass in the states where it has been legalized, as does recreational marijuana in Colorado and Washington State.
Then there is Syria. Some group of people there (the lone gunman theory not being bought by anyone in this case) used some type of nerve gas agent on a sufficient scale to kill hundreds of people, who are usually described as civilians. It is generally agreed this happened to a neighborhood of Damascus that is pro-Rebel and anti-President Bashar al-Assad. But Bashar denies giving the order, and a U.N. investigation team has not formed conclusions yet.
Nevertheless, former law professor, now President Barack Obama wants to bomb Syria. It won't be to help the rebels, supposedly, especially since the rebels are now led by Sunni Islamic fundamentalists. It's just a sort of international spanking, grounding (economic embargoes) having not done the trick, so far. If Syrians just go back to killing each other with small arms, artillery and the occasional beheading, Obama will be alright with that.
War crimes are a funny (odd, legally peculiar) thing. War itself is a war crime, since all wars have to be started, and starting a war is a war crime. Once a war is started there are a set of rules both sides are supposed to adhere to. If the war has a winner, the winner usually prosecutes the losing side for war crimes. Winners usually don't prosecute themselves for war crimes, though in a few cases low-level soldiers or officers have been prosecuted.
Obama can't easily try Bashar for war crimes, not without a successful invasion of Syria. But there are all sorts of war criminals he could prosecute. He has simply not chosen to make that a priority for the Justice Department.
There are the Vietnam era war criminals, many of whom are still alive. They started a war with North Vietnam, which was a war crime. They killed vast quantities of civilians both in South and North Vietnam, which was a war crime. They used chemical warfare in the form of napalm and Agent Orange, which was a war crime. They also invaded Laos and Cambodia, also war crimes. They supervised the South Vietnamese murdering civilians and POWs, which was a war crime. These war criminals would be easy to arrest and not too hard to prosecute. But it isn't a priority.
Among the other war criminals milling around Washington, D.C. and the various united States are those who initiated wars on Grenada, the states formerly known as Yugoslavia, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Libya. I probably left out a few.
Perhaps this illustration of the importance of prioritization is a mere coincidence. After all, Obama did not time the nerve gas incident, unless it was the work of the CIA. You may not realize it, but for those who plan ahead, like politicians and their stockholders, this is the gearing up time for the 2014 elections. One-third of the U.S. Senate seats will be up for grabs, as well as the entire House of Representatives. While incumbents almost always win, you can never be sure. Fundraising is in full swing and potential opponents are calculating their odds. Primaries are only a few months away.
Here in Mendocino County, where Republicans are distinguished mainly by their having enough money to smoke more than their fair share of the dope, there will be a backlash against both of Barack Obama's policies. Only the most loyal of Obamacrats want him to bomb Syria. More important, everyone is nervous about the price of marijuana. It is bound to drop as more people enter the market. To some extent that can be compensated by growing more, but at some point trying to sell marijuana will be like trying to sell houses in 2008.
Some people might have to actually make money with their real jobs, instead of just using them to launder cash.
But it is not Mendocino County that the Democratic Party bigwigs are worried about. It is the districts where the two war crimes organizations known as political parties are about evenly balanced. The competitive districts that determine which party gets to spend the loot gathered from taxpayers.
Bombing Syria makes Obama look tough, which is generally considered to be a positive thing with the voters. But it might alienate the peace-loving wing of the Democratic Party. The new marijuana policy is meant to placate that wing.
Its hard to tell what dose will work out best. Just enough dope to get people to calm down and forget about all the ways Obama has disappointed the hopes they had for him. Not so much dope as to be too out of it to vote the Democratic Party ticket come election day.
Two seemingly unconnected events happened this week. The Obama administration (but not Obama himself) announced it would issue instructions to federal officers and prosecutors that set new priorities for the federal enforcement of marijuana laws. This is largely the result of 21 states (if you include the city of D.C.) having legalized medical marijuana, with two, Washington State and Colorado having also legalized recreational marijuana.
It took Barack Obama only six years to figure this out. The preponderance of voters are now for marijuana legalization, and the Democratic Party has been taking a lot of heat on the issue for years. The new priorities for busting people are: when the weed crosses state lines; when it is sold or given to minors; when the proceeds are used to fund other criminal enterprises; when the entrepreneurs have not made donations to the Democratic Party. In theory at least medical marijuana gets a pass in the states where it has been legalized, as does recreational marijuana in Colorado and Washington State.
Then there is Syria. Some group of people there (the lone gunman theory not being bought by anyone in this case) used some type of nerve gas agent on a sufficient scale to kill hundreds of people, who are usually described as civilians. It is generally agreed this happened to a neighborhood of Damascus that is pro-Rebel and anti-President Bashar al-Assad. But Bashar denies giving the order, and a U.N. investigation team has not formed conclusions yet.
Nevertheless, former law professor, now President Barack Obama wants to bomb Syria. It won't be to help the rebels, supposedly, especially since the rebels are now led by Sunni Islamic fundamentalists. It's just a sort of international spanking, grounding (economic embargoes) having not done the trick, so far. If Syrians just go back to killing each other with small arms, artillery and the occasional beheading, Obama will be alright with that.
War crimes are a funny (odd, legally peculiar) thing. War itself is a war crime, since all wars have to be started, and starting a war is a war crime. Once a war is started there are a set of rules both sides are supposed to adhere to. If the war has a winner, the winner usually prosecutes the losing side for war crimes. Winners usually don't prosecute themselves for war crimes, though in a few cases low-level soldiers or officers have been prosecuted.
Obama can't easily try Bashar for war crimes, not without a successful invasion of Syria. But there are all sorts of war criminals he could prosecute. He has simply not chosen to make that a priority for the Justice Department.
There are the Vietnam era war criminals, many of whom are still alive. They started a war with North Vietnam, which was a war crime. They killed vast quantities of civilians both in South and North Vietnam, which was a war crime. They used chemical warfare in the form of napalm and Agent Orange, which was a war crime. They also invaded Laos and Cambodia, also war crimes. They supervised the South Vietnamese murdering civilians and POWs, which was a war crime. These war criminals would be easy to arrest and not too hard to prosecute. But it isn't a priority.
Among the other war criminals milling around Washington, D.C. and the various united States are those who initiated wars on Grenada, the states formerly known as Yugoslavia, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Libya. I probably left out a few.
Perhaps this illustration of the importance of prioritization is a mere coincidence. After all, Obama did not time the nerve gas incident, unless it was the work of the CIA. You may not realize it, but for those who plan ahead, like politicians and their stockholders, this is the gearing up time for the 2014 elections. One-third of the U.S. Senate seats will be up for grabs, as well as the entire House of Representatives. While incumbents almost always win, you can never be sure. Fundraising is in full swing and potential opponents are calculating their odds. Primaries are only a few months away.
Here in Mendocino County, where Republicans are distinguished mainly by their having enough money to smoke more than their fair share of the dope, there will be a backlash against both of Barack Obama's policies. Only the most loyal of Obamacrats want him to bomb Syria. More important, everyone is nervous about the price of marijuana. It is bound to drop as more people enter the market. To some extent that can be compensated by growing more, but at some point trying to sell marijuana will be like trying to sell houses in 2008.
Some people might have to actually make money with their real jobs, instead of just using them to launder cash.
But it is not Mendocino County that the Democratic Party bigwigs are worried about. It is the districts where the two war crimes organizations known as political parties are about evenly balanced. The competitive districts that determine which party gets to spend the loot gathered from taxpayers.
Bombing Syria makes Obama look tough, which is generally considered to be a positive thing with the voters. But it might alienate the peace-loving wing of the Democratic Party. The new marijuana policy is meant to placate that wing.
Its hard to tell what dose will work out best. Just enough dope to get people to calm down and forget about all the ways Obama has disappointed the hopes they had for him. Not so much dope as to be too out of it to vote the Democratic Party ticket come election day.
Sunday, May 19, 2013
Persecuting the Cannabis Community is a Crime Against Humanity
Rather than reposting here, I'll just give you the link:
Persecution of Cannabis Community is a Crime Against Humanity Which is at Mendoday, my Mendocino County web site.
Of course crimes against humanity come in shades of gray, ugly shades of gray. In Roman Catholic, Francoist Spain (1936-1975) they shot people with no or minimalist trials just for not being a good Catholic supporter of the General. It is not that bad for marijuana users in the U.S., though millions have been put in prisons with serious detrimental effects on their lives. It means they are on record as being criminals, which makes it hard to find employment, and as felons they may lose the right to vote. The black market also means the stakes are high enough in the trade to result in deaths inflicted by fighting over profits.
Persecution of Cannabis Community is a Crime Against Humanity Which is at Mendoday, my Mendocino County web site.
Of course crimes against humanity come in shades of gray, ugly shades of gray. In Roman Catholic, Francoist Spain (1936-1975) they shot people with no or minimalist trials just for not being a good Catholic supporter of the General. It is not that bad for marijuana users in the U.S., though millions have been put in prisons with serious detrimental effects on their lives. It means they are on record as being criminals, which makes it hard to find employment, and as felons they may lose the right to vote. The black market also means the stakes are high enough in the trade to result in deaths inflicted by fighting over profits.
Sunday, March 17, 2013
Sequester, Marijuana, and Useless Politicians
A tidal wave of criticism has hit the federal budget cuts popularly called "the sequester." I kind of like the budget cuts. They are not exactly how I would do things, but let's step back and look at the bright side of the news, the silver lining.
Those liberals who pretend that racking up an ever-higher national debt is not a problem might want to go back to high school and study the section of algebra dealing with compound interest. That includes you, Robert Reich. Until they do that there is probably no point arguing. This particular essay is for those of you who understand that debts do need to be repaid, and the United States of America could become a third-rate nation again (as it was in 1781) if it does not get its finances straightened out pretty quickly.
Every politician has his paymasters and even is, to a small degrees, subject to the voters of her district. The military budget is based on putting military bases or contracts in almost every Congressional district. No pol wants cuts to affect their district. Social Security payments go out to every district. Farm payments mostly to to farm states, but they have disproportionate influence in the U.S. Senate because even states where heat-seeking drones would have trouble finding a few voters still get 2 Senators. And so on, so that any cuts in the federal budget hurt some people in enough congressional districts to preclude that particular budget line getting cut in a fair and open vote.
Everybody's priorities differ. I would cut the military budget by 90% if the American people would lend me an ax, but I am countered by people who would feel a lot safer if the military budget were doubled and the Medicaid budget were cut by 90%. It is true on every issue. One citizen's subsidy is another's tax burden.
We have three choices: pay more federal taxes, reduce the federal budget, or implode financially some time between now and (I'm guessing) 2020.
I actually am willing to pay somewhat more in federal taxes, but as a humble, not particularly successful journalist I am at the low end of the income and taxation spectrum. I wish I was making a million a year and could pay just $300,000 or so in taxes. But I know if I was the kind of person who thought $1 million a year was just deserts for having gone to med school or law school or business school or even the school of hard knocks, it would seem to me like I could get a lot of pleasure out of that $300,000, and maybe the recipients of federal largesse could try a little harder rather than sitting around waiting for my money to be transferred into their greedy and lazy hands.
And who do the politicians want as a friend in the primary? Me, with my $25 donations, or the $1 million per annum income guy with his $10,000 donations and bundling of ten such donations just to sit at a table near the guy who doles out the dollars and tax breaks?
The federal government is not a socialist government. It owns no industry (well, maybe a few ammunition plants and the like). It spends other people's money, and for the most part does not spend it very productively. It does not even tax the rich to subsidize Social Security.
And let's take some responsibility, folks. Yes, us. We want to stop wasting public safety money criminalizing marijuana, but nothing ever changes at the national level. The Democrats almost never deliver on any of their promises, Obama in particular.
Then there are you Republicans out there who should know the value of social peace and good infrastructure. Without social peace there will be no profits. Social Security, food stamps, and federal spending on education and healthcare buy some social peace. Cut them out, and the Bolsheviks will come back out of the woodwork (where I happen to know they are still lurking, like bedbugs, and increasingly pesticide-resistant).
You Republicans elected the Republican twits in Congress, and they are in a majority in the House of Representatives. They are too busy striking poses for Tea Party fanatics to actually spend some time governing. As a result, the military budget has been cut along with the rest of the lot. We might have to make do with one less aircraft carrier. Which still means we have just about all of the functioning aircraft carriers in the world.
So programs that genuinely protect public safety are being cut. But a lot of bullshit is being cut too. The problem is not the budget cuts, but the failure to get rid of loopholes and agricultural and industrial subsidies. Make the oil and gas companies pay some taxes for a change. Tax the alcohol producers.
Fortunately the economy is growing. This is a testament to the people who get up and work every Monday, including the honest, productive business managers and owners. With a growing economy tax revenues should grow, even with all of the tax-dodges out there.
That will not be enough, not for a while. The Congress is supposed to run the Pentagon, but the Pentagon runs Congress. The rich should be thankful they had the opportunity to get rich by exploiting their fellow Americans, but all most of them do is bitch. ["This cocaine isn't very pure!" or "Why is that homeless person ruining the view from my Mercedes?" "Or, what do you mean I can't deduct my wife's collection of $10,000 boots as a business expenses?"] Especially the ones who get their money from trust funds and inheritances. Despite my dislike of Lenin and Stalin, the idea of just lining up the trust fund set for liquidation does have a certain emotional appeal.
I say, let's sequester more in 2014. Let's sequester 20% of the military and homeland security budget, 20% of the subsidies to corporate farming, and 20% of anything that goes to anti-marijuana majority states until they let my people go.
I mean it. Let my pot heads go. Did you hear that, Representatives? President Obama? Senators? If you can't even accomplish that, what do we need you for?
Those liberals who pretend that racking up an ever-higher national debt is not a problem might want to go back to high school and study the section of algebra dealing with compound interest. That includes you, Robert Reich. Until they do that there is probably no point arguing. This particular essay is for those of you who understand that debts do need to be repaid, and the United States of America could become a third-rate nation again (as it was in 1781) if it does not get its finances straightened out pretty quickly.
Every politician has his paymasters and even is, to a small degrees, subject to the voters of her district. The military budget is based on putting military bases or contracts in almost every Congressional district. No pol wants cuts to affect their district. Social Security payments go out to every district. Farm payments mostly to to farm states, but they have disproportionate influence in the U.S. Senate because even states where heat-seeking drones would have trouble finding a few voters still get 2 Senators. And so on, so that any cuts in the federal budget hurt some people in enough congressional districts to preclude that particular budget line getting cut in a fair and open vote.
Everybody's priorities differ. I would cut the military budget by 90% if the American people would lend me an ax, but I am countered by people who would feel a lot safer if the military budget were doubled and the Medicaid budget were cut by 90%. It is true on every issue. One citizen's subsidy is another's tax burden.
We have three choices: pay more federal taxes, reduce the federal budget, or implode financially some time between now and (I'm guessing) 2020.
I actually am willing to pay somewhat more in federal taxes, but as a humble, not particularly successful journalist I am at the low end of the income and taxation spectrum. I wish I was making a million a year and could pay just $300,000 or so in taxes. But I know if I was the kind of person who thought $1 million a year was just deserts for having gone to med school or law school or business school or even the school of hard knocks, it would seem to me like I could get a lot of pleasure out of that $300,000, and maybe the recipients of federal largesse could try a little harder rather than sitting around waiting for my money to be transferred into their greedy and lazy hands.
And who do the politicians want as a friend in the primary? Me, with my $25 donations, or the $1 million per annum income guy with his $10,000 donations and bundling of ten such donations just to sit at a table near the guy who doles out the dollars and tax breaks?
The federal government is not a socialist government. It owns no industry (well, maybe a few ammunition plants and the like). It spends other people's money, and for the most part does not spend it very productively. It does not even tax the rich to subsidize Social Security.
And let's take some responsibility, folks. Yes, us. We want to stop wasting public safety money criminalizing marijuana, but nothing ever changes at the national level. The Democrats almost never deliver on any of their promises, Obama in particular.
Then there are you Republicans out there who should know the value of social peace and good infrastructure. Without social peace there will be no profits. Social Security, food stamps, and federal spending on education and healthcare buy some social peace. Cut them out, and the Bolsheviks will come back out of the woodwork (where I happen to know they are still lurking, like bedbugs, and increasingly pesticide-resistant).
You Republicans elected the Republican twits in Congress, and they are in a majority in the House of Representatives. They are too busy striking poses for Tea Party fanatics to actually spend some time governing. As a result, the military budget has been cut along with the rest of the lot. We might have to make do with one less aircraft carrier. Which still means we have just about all of the functioning aircraft carriers in the world.
So programs that genuinely protect public safety are being cut. But a lot of bullshit is being cut too. The problem is not the budget cuts, but the failure to get rid of loopholes and agricultural and industrial subsidies. Make the oil and gas companies pay some taxes for a change. Tax the alcohol producers.
Fortunately the economy is growing. This is a testament to the people who get up and work every Monday, including the honest, productive business managers and owners. With a growing economy tax revenues should grow, even with all of the tax-dodges out there.
That will not be enough, not for a while. The Congress is supposed to run the Pentagon, but the Pentagon runs Congress. The rich should be thankful they had the opportunity to get rich by exploiting their fellow Americans, but all most of them do is bitch. ["This cocaine isn't very pure!" or "Why is that homeless person ruining the view from my Mercedes?" "Or, what do you mean I can't deduct my wife's collection of $10,000 boots as a business expenses?"] Especially the ones who get their money from trust funds and inheritances. Despite my dislike of Lenin and Stalin, the idea of just lining up the trust fund set for liquidation does have a certain emotional appeal.
I say, let's sequester more in 2014. Let's sequester 20% of the military and homeland security budget, 20% of the subsidies to corporate farming, and 20% of anything that goes to anti-marijuana majority states until they let my people go.
I mean it. Let my pot heads go. Did you hear that, Representatives? President Obama? Senators? If you can't even accomplish that, what do we need you for?
Monday, May 7, 2012
Obama Pisses on California Before Primary
Barack Obama may be the first sort-of black President of the United States, but his political heritage is not much different than the entire line of Presidents starting with real-estate speculator George Washington. Barack will be the only choice on the Democratic Party Presidential ballot line for the June 5 election. The total corruption and march-in-line behind the leader mentality of the party is shown by the lack of even token progressive and anti-war opposition.
Knowing the Democratic Party nomination is locked up, and wanting to appeal to right-wing voters, Barack Obama ordered widespread, unconstitutional raids on our perfectly legal medical marijuana purveyors. It's a funny thing, the way almost all media sources keep the Obama name out of the stories about the raids. It is always the Justice Department. Like Obama is not head of the government. Like he could not order the stormtroopers to go after other crimes. Are there no Islamic teenagers who might be entrapped by agents offering them a chance to play with government-supplied C-4? Are there no criminals violating Disney's copyrights needing to be rounded up and put in concentration camps?
It is not just his Reaganesque marijuana policy that mocks California's enlightened citizenry. There's his anti-gay marriage stand. His ongoing military attacks on Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen, plus anti-Iranian saber rattling. His promotion of the very men who created the mortgage derivatives and banking meltdown to be his top economic advisors. His failure to vigorously protect women's reproductive rights. His half-ass reformulation of the healthcare for profit system.
But what is a Democrat to do? It is too late to send Him a message by re-registering Green or No Political Preference (the new Decline to State, known everywhere else as independent). You can do that after the primary.
All you can do is vote for your favorite local candidates (up to and including Congress) and then not vote for Barack Obama. Barack does not give a damn how you feel about him, as long as he is the head of the corporate security state. He's going to be the next President. What not voting for Obama will do is show, when the votes are counted, that you care about California and your fellow Californians.
According to my readings of John Steinbeck, pretty many California citizens were smoking marijuana long before the 1960s rolled around. Since the 1960s California citizens have almost all been tolerant of their neighbors who choose to smoke. Sure, there are occasional problems with stoned citizens, but they pale compared to the problems of drunk citizens, and they don't seem to be significantly higher than the problems we encounter with perfectly sober citizens, either.
We Californians are a nation of individuals, but we do mostly share some cultural values, like respecting individual diversity. We have a disproportionate number of agnostics and atheists among us, and even our religious citizens tend more to humanist spirituality and ethical conduct than to memorize-the-text orthodoxy. We believe in evolution, and are evolving, but are ruled by people whose brain capacities froze at Middle Ages levels of memory and compute capabilities.
There are about 38 million of us. There were less than 4 million people living in the original 13 states at the time of the American Revolution, and that included slaves and Native Americans.
We should demand some respect from the rest of the states. If they do not respect our ways and our values, including ending marijuana prohibition, we should began the process of (hopefully without a civil war) leaving other United States and governing ourselves.
Because we can govern ourselves a lot better than the eastern states can govern us.
We don't need the national parties, either. Even if we stay in the Union, California citizens should have their own political parties, subject to our own corrupt bosses and political machines, rather than to the corrupt national bosses and machines.
Let's make that a goal: at least one California-centric party by 2014.
Knowing the Democratic Party nomination is locked up, and wanting to appeal to right-wing voters, Barack Obama ordered widespread, unconstitutional raids on our perfectly legal medical marijuana purveyors. It's a funny thing, the way almost all media sources keep the Obama name out of the stories about the raids. It is always the Justice Department. Like Obama is not head of the government. Like he could not order the stormtroopers to go after other crimes. Are there no Islamic teenagers who might be entrapped by agents offering them a chance to play with government-supplied C-4? Are there no criminals violating Disney's copyrights needing to be rounded up and put in concentration camps?
It is not just his Reaganesque marijuana policy that mocks California's enlightened citizenry. There's his anti-gay marriage stand. His ongoing military attacks on Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia and Yemen, plus anti-Iranian saber rattling. His promotion of the very men who created the mortgage derivatives and banking meltdown to be his top economic advisors. His failure to vigorously protect women's reproductive rights. His half-ass reformulation of the healthcare for profit system.
But what is a Democrat to do? It is too late to send Him a message by re-registering Green or No Political Preference (the new Decline to State, known everywhere else as independent). You can do that after the primary.
All you can do is vote for your favorite local candidates (up to and including Congress) and then not vote for Barack Obama. Barack does not give a damn how you feel about him, as long as he is the head of the corporate security state. He's going to be the next President. What not voting for Obama will do is show, when the votes are counted, that you care about California and your fellow Californians.
According to my readings of John Steinbeck, pretty many California citizens were smoking marijuana long before the 1960s rolled around. Since the 1960s California citizens have almost all been tolerant of their neighbors who choose to smoke. Sure, there are occasional problems with stoned citizens, but they pale compared to the problems of drunk citizens, and they don't seem to be significantly higher than the problems we encounter with perfectly sober citizens, either.
We Californians are a nation of individuals, but we do mostly share some cultural values, like respecting individual diversity. We have a disproportionate number of agnostics and atheists among us, and even our religious citizens tend more to humanist spirituality and ethical conduct than to memorize-the-text orthodoxy. We believe in evolution, and are evolving, but are ruled by people whose brain capacities froze at Middle Ages levels of memory and compute capabilities.
There are about 38 million of us. There were less than 4 million people living in the original 13 states at the time of the American Revolution, and that included slaves and Native Americans.
We should demand some respect from the rest of the states. If they do not respect our ways and our values, including ending marijuana prohibition, we should began the process of (hopefully without a civil war) leaving other United States and governing ourselves.
Because we can govern ourselves a lot better than the eastern states can govern us.
We don't need the national parties, either. Even if we stay in the Union, California citizens should have their own political parties, subject to our own corrupt bosses and political machines, rather than to the corrupt national bosses and machines.
Let's make that a goal: at least one California-centric party by 2014.
Tuesday, November 29, 2011
Professors Barack Obama, Newt Gingrich, and Woodrow Wilson
This week Newton Gingrich has become the Republican Party Presidential primary candidate best positioned to beat front-runner Mitt Romney. Before he was a politician Newt was a History Professor. President Obama was a Law Professor before he became a politician. When you look at the history of American Presidents, college professor is not a very common occupation. The other exception was Woodrow Wilson, who was a professor of Political Economy at Princeton.
While Newt has not been, and may not be President, he did hold what I believe should be a more important office, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives (from 1995 to 1999).
There is a saying that if you can't do, teach, but teaching is an important human activity. College professors also usually do some research and writing. How good is that as preparation to be President of the United States of America?
Woodrow Wilson served as President of the United States from 1913 until the beginning of 1921. Before that he served as governor of New Jersey from 1911. He is typically portrayed as a progressive President who also showed his spine by siding with the British Empire and the French Empire against Germany in World War I.
While Wilson did support some needed reforms like women's right to vote, on the whole he was a romantic reactionary. Most notably, he was a racist. When he ran for President in 1912, as a Democrat he could depend on the "Solid" racist, south, where Negroes (a respectful term then) were not allowed to vote. He made campaign promises to Negro voters in northern states, gaining many of their votes. Then he presided over segregation of the federal government, even instructing Post Offices to set up racially segregated windows to serve customers. He also fired most black federal employees and appointed white southerners in the places.
In other words, although Wilson was able to break with the past on some issues, his mind was not unusually far ranging. He lectured the nation and Congress, but all too often his lectures had no basis in human experience. I would argue that Wilson was a disaster, and that disaster echoed through the 20th century, adversely affecting not just Americans, but people around the globe.
For instance Woodrow Wilson thought no one should drink alcohol. Is that progressive or conservative? He refused to serve it at the White House, and on January 16, 1919, the Eighteenth Amendment was ratified, making "intoxicating liquors" illegal throughout the United States. Certainly consumption of alcohol has some bad effects. But Prohibition did not stop the flow of alcohol. Instead it created black markets and attendant crime and political corruption. Just like Barack Obama's attacks on medical marijuana clinics are doing today.
Imperialism was a big issue in the 1912 elections. The United States had become an imperialist system in the late 1800's. Both Democratic Party farmers (the nation was not yet mainly urban) and reformers were against imperialism, and candidate Wilson said anti-imperialistic things, just as Barack Obama would hint he was an anti-war, anti-defense spending candidate in 2008. But Wilson invaded more nations that any other President, not even counting World War I. He invaded Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Mexico. For good measure he bought the Virgin Islands. In the super-hypocrisy department he signed the Jones Act in 1916, which promised independence to the Philippines. The Philippines did not get independence until the Japanese granted it to them during World War II.
For Wilson the idea was more important than the deed. Because he thought the South should have won the Civil War, he supported the idea of what we would now call national autonomy. Back then it was called national self-determination. But, after World War I, when the Japanese asked that Asia be de-colonized, Wilson vetoed that idea. Self-determination, he made clear, was for white people, not subhumans, which is how he regarded non-white ethnic groups. This insult to the Japanese and the people of Asia would result in the disintegration of China, a number of colonial wars, World War II, and then more colonial wars, ending only when the British Empire, a bastion of autocratic governance unparalleled in history, ceded Hong Kong back to the nation of China.
Barack Obama, too, is better at speaking than at getting things done. That is probably a good thing, considering the blow back the U.S. is getting from his attempts to boss around Islamic people. If Barack does not get a second term, at least his acts are unlikely to cause as much damage in the 21st century as President Wilson did in the 20th.
Which brings us to Newt Gingrich. If you compare Newt to Wilson or Obama, he is clearly the more competent guy. Even though I disagree with his policies, his strategy and tactics in the 1990's were brilliant.
The problem with Newt is not that he does not know history. I grant him a knowledge of history. His problem is that his mind filters out all the facts that do not match his pre-determined conclusions about how America and the world should be governed.
He has not even learned the lesson of the Great Depression, and a whole string of forgotten depressions earlier in U.S. and world history: capitalism destroys itself, left unchecked. Another lesson: too much concentration of wealth leads to poorly performing national economies. Another lesson: empires that spend too much on their militaries suffer economic collapse.
I am forced to conclude that electing former professors to be President is not, in general, a good idea. There could be exceptions, of course, but neither Mr. Gingrich nor President Obama is one of them.
While Newt has not been, and may not be President, he did hold what I believe should be a more important office, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives (from 1995 to 1999).
There is a saying that if you can't do, teach, but teaching is an important human activity. College professors also usually do some research and writing. How good is that as preparation to be President of the United States of America?
Woodrow Wilson served as President of the United States from 1913 until the beginning of 1921. Before that he served as governor of New Jersey from 1911. He is typically portrayed as a progressive President who also showed his spine by siding with the British Empire and the French Empire against Germany in World War I.
While Wilson did support some needed reforms like women's right to vote, on the whole he was a romantic reactionary. Most notably, he was a racist. When he ran for President in 1912, as a Democrat he could depend on the "Solid" racist, south, where Negroes (a respectful term then) were not allowed to vote. He made campaign promises to Negro voters in northern states, gaining many of their votes. Then he presided over segregation of the federal government, even instructing Post Offices to set up racially segregated windows to serve customers. He also fired most black federal employees and appointed white southerners in the places.
In other words, although Wilson was able to break with the past on some issues, his mind was not unusually far ranging. He lectured the nation and Congress, but all too often his lectures had no basis in human experience. I would argue that Wilson was a disaster, and that disaster echoed through the 20th century, adversely affecting not just Americans, but people around the globe.
For instance Woodrow Wilson thought no one should drink alcohol. Is that progressive or conservative? He refused to serve it at the White House, and on January 16, 1919, the Eighteenth Amendment was ratified, making "intoxicating liquors" illegal throughout the United States. Certainly consumption of alcohol has some bad effects. But Prohibition did not stop the flow of alcohol. Instead it created black markets and attendant crime and political corruption. Just like Barack Obama's attacks on medical marijuana clinics are doing today.
Imperialism was a big issue in the 1912 elections. The United States had become an imperialist system in the late 1800's. Both Democratic Party farmers (the nation was not yet mainly urban) and reformers were against imperialism, and candidate Wilson said anti-imperialistic things, just as Barack Obama would hint he was an anti-war, anti-defense spending candidate in 2008. But Wilson invaded more nations that any other President, not even counting World War I. He invaded Haiti, the Dominican Republic, Nicaragua, Cuba, and Mexico. For good measure he bought the Virgin Islands. In the super-hypocrisy department he signed the Jones Act in 1916, which promised independence to the Philippines. The Philippines did not get independence until the Japanese granted it to them during World War II.
For Wilson the idea was more important than the deed. Because he thought the South should have won the Civil War, he supported the idea of what we would now call national autonomy. Back then it was called national self-determination. But, after World War I, when the Japanese asked that Asia be de-colonized, Wilson vetoed that idea. Self-determination, he made clear, was for white people, not subhumans, which is how he regarded non-white ethnic groups. This insult to the Japanese and the people of Asia would result in the disintegration of China, a number of colonial wars, World War II, and then more colonial wars, ending only when the British Empire, a bastion of autocratic governance unparalleled in history, ceded Hong Kong back to the nation of China.
Barack Obama, too, is better at speaking than at getting things done. That is probably a good thing, considering the blow back the U.S. is getting from his attempts to boss around Islamic people. If Barack does not get a second term, at least his acts are unlikely to cause as much damage in the 21st century as President Wilson did in the 20th.
Which brings us to Newt Gingrich. If you compare Newt to Wilson or Obama, he is clearly the more competent guy. Even though I disagree with his policies, his strategy and tactics in the 1990's were brilliant.
The problem with Newt is not that he does not know history. I grant him a knowledge of history. His problem is that his mind filters out all the facts that do not match his pre-determined conclusions about how America and the world should be governed.
He has not even learned the lesson of the Great Depression, and a whole string of forgotten depressions earlier in U.S. and world history: capitalism destroys itself, left unchecked. Another lesson: too much concentration of wealth leads to poorly performing national economies. Another lesson: empires that spend too much on their militaries suffer economic collapse.
I am forced to conclude that electing former professors to be President is not, in general, a good idea. There could be exceptions, of course, but neither Mr. Gingrich nor President Obama is one of them.
Tuesday, May 18, 2010
Puff the Magic Obama
Mendocino County growers are excited by prospects of an economic turn-around based on a strain being grown this year: Obama Magic Puff. First grown in small quantities in 2008, and marketed in some quantity in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles after the fall harvest of 2009, it was a favorite strain to plant this spring.
"We've actually been hurt by medical marijuana and the recession; there is too much supply, and prices are down. Mendocino County is known for its organic farming and banning genetically modified organisms. We are building that brand recognition, but Obama Magic Puff is our bridge to the future," said Ten Miles Ted.
"What distinguishes Obama Magic Puff from other high-quality, Mendocino grown bud?"
"It makes you really, really hopeful. You imagine all sorts of great things are going to happen. Then you come down from the high, and nothing has changed. But you really want the high again," said Ted. "Users don't like the world they come back to, so they light up again. It really sells, and at a premium to other strains."
Which reminds me that this is One Thousand Day. The day over 1000 American soldiers have died fighting in Afghanistan. Note that we don't count our dead allied foreign mercenaries, or the dead police and soldiers of the Afghan war lord Karzai, or dead Taliban, or civilians. That is 100% pure All-American 1000 dead gunmen. Almost half of them have been killed since President Barack Obama took office, even though the U.S. war of aggression against Afghanistan started back in 2002 under now largely forgotten former President George W. Bush.
"We've actually been hurt by medical marijuana and the recession; there is too much supply, and prices are down. Mendocino County is known for its organic farming and banning genetically modified organisms. We are building that brand recognition, but Obama Magic Puff is our bridge to the future," said Ten Miles Ted.
"What distinguishes Obama Magic Puff from other high-quality, Mendocino grown bud?"
"It makes you really, really hopeful. You imagine all sorts of great things are going to happen. Then you come down from the high, and nothing has changed. But you really want the high again," said Ted. "Users don't like the world they come back to, so they light up again. It really sells, and at a premium to other strains."
Which reminds me that this is One Thousand Day. The day over 1000 American soldiers have died fighting in Afghanistan. Note that we don't count our dead allied foreign mercenaries, or the dead police and soldiers of the Afghan war lord Karzai, or dead Taliban, or civilians. That is 100% pure All-American 1000 dead gunmen. Almost half of them have been killed since President Barack Obama took office, even though the U.S. war of aggression against Afghanistan started back in 2002 under now largely forgotten former President George W. Bush.
But there is Hope. President Obama is going to solve the problem by sending even more troops to prop up war lords Karzai & Co. Hopefully all those U.S. troops will force the Taliban (or perhaps we should call them Afghan nationalists) to negotiate. Or to realize that Apple Pie, Christianity and iPhones are superior to their inferior way of life, lay down their weapons, and open Burger King franchises.
I went to a party Saturday which included a sizeable bunch of former Obama supporters. They avoided the topic of politics. They still hate the Republican Party. If George W. Bush were doing the exact same things Obama is doing now — funding nuclear reactors, allowing new areas for drilling for oil offshore, sending more troops to Afghanistan — they would be frothing at the mouth and organizing lame demonstrations at the local post office.
Barack Obama is supposed to be a brilliant politician, and of course he knows if you are going to take hits you want to take them early in your term of office. He doubtless knows that he can get away with almost anything because the economy is bound to improve between now and the 2012 Presidential election.
The one thing he cannot do, politically, is lose a war. Even though most Americans are sick of the war in Afghanistan, there will be a stigma to losing it. If Obama had pulled out the first month he was President, the situation might not be so pregnant with disaster. He would have taken a hit on the right, but would have gained on the left by ending an unpopular war. Now he is married to the war; a divorce would be ugly.
Thus history repeats himself, as I predicted it would in Barack Obama: Will He Dick Nixon Us? [July 8, 2008].
Cultural notes
Puff the Magic Dragon [song released in 1963]
Barack, the Magic Negro [right wing parody, allegedly racist]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
