***The following is written by my friend Jack Nelson***
Drug prohibition is a multi-billion dollar subsidy to our worst enemies; the Colombian F A R C, Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and similar
monsters. And millions of Americans learn their values in gangs and
prisons, a sort of collateral damage from the War on Drugs. As for the friendly governments of the producing and transit countries, injecting DEA money into their corrupt institutions must often be counterproductive.
Alcohol prohibition 80 years ago criminalized a social and health problem, handing a giant market to the underworld. A market impossible to expunge. The mafias of 1920 were just little gangs of thugs, but giving them the very lucrative alcohol market turned them into international businesses, with all the sophistication and power associated. Today, international terrorists are the beneficiaries of misguided policies on drugs. Struggling democracies are corrupted by the threats and monies.
Like alcohol and tobacco, we should license noxious drugs to control that market too. Alcohol and tobacco are in essence cheap agricultural products. The market tolerates the high markup of taxation. Illegal drugs are likewise cheap products, but in their case the markup goes to the traffickers. Dope is already so available; we have little reason to think legalization would increase net use and addiction rates. The ready availability on the street is proof that prohibition does not work.
We should stop spending billions on failed persecution and start collecting high taxes. Again, like alcohol and tobacco. This enormous budget windfall should be spent on the causes of drug abuse. We need education, health, jobs, and community programs. That rational policy would have positive societal effects, free the military and police to deal with real priorities, and strip hundreds of billions of dollars from gangs and terrorists.
Yes, hundreds of billions. The market is enormous. Likewise, the fatuous waste of military and police and courts and prisons adds up to more hundreds of billions. This huge waste of funds is the corollary to the waste of lives by turning a social and health problem into a crime.
We should learn the lessons of history.
Jack
Those who have followed this blog for awhile know that I agree that drug probibition is a failed proposition. I have also opined that politics lags social change. This is one of those cases where getting ahead of that curve is political suicide. Talking about it can start the social change that would allow for political change.
Showing posts with label Guest. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Guest. Show all posts
Friday, February 27, 2009
Sunday, November 18, 2007
Flip Flop
***This is a guest piece***
By Steve Culley
The most amazing thing came out of the democratic debate in Las Vegas. When asked, “do you favor driver’s licenses for illegal aliens?”, Hillary Clinton gave a very concise “no” answer.
A little background is in order to illuminate why this answer shows that even though you might think you are wasting your time being an activists you can change the world or at least the course of national history. As some who pay a little bit of attention might recall, we had a great big immigration fight last spring in congress over open borders George’s proposal to legalize the invasion of this country. I referred to it as “comprehensive amnesty” while GWB and the democrats referred to it as “comprehensive immigration reform” so the illegal, undocumented, aliens could come out of the shadows and do jobs Americans won’t do, because they just want to feed their families, and no person is illegal, so they can go to the back of the line and apply for citizenship, before they petition the rest of their family to come too, while the Minute Men, Oregonians for Immigration Reform, Numbers USA and a host of others called it by the true name of invasion while democrats assured us we need to celebrate diversity because we are a nation of immigrants and it is really Mexican territory anyway and yada yada yada to quote Seinfeld.
It was a dog and pony show with the corporate globalist using all the spin they could to convince the average Joe that what’s good for big business is good for him, even if it means outsourcing his job while importing someone who will compete for his new lower paying one. And some might have noticed that the democrats formed a symbiotic relationship with open borders George. You couldn’t slide a piece of paper between them and GWB. Almost all of them were stuck like glue to George. Makes me wonder why people still think they actually don’t like George. GWB is the best president Mexico ever had and the democrats in the senate are the best senators Mexico ever had. Chief among them was Hillary Clinton, all for a path to citizenship, no border fences, quit harassing illegals by raids, easy voter registration etc. Then two weeks ago she was asked about New York governor Elliot Spitzer’s attempt to give out the same drivers licenses to illegal aliens as citizens and she was all for it. That was before Luo Dobbs lead the charge against it and there was serious talk of recalling Spitzer. Hillary’s poll numbers started to drop like a rock and she flip flopped for a week before the Clinton machine turned up the heat on the poor governor and he pulled his proposal. Hillary is now a tough on illegal aliens gal.
Seems like the democrats and Hillary got the message. Americans are fed up with the corporate sanctioned invasion of this country. Illegal immigration is an issue whether the mainstream media wants to acknowledge it or not. Oregon will hold a primary election too and our governor seems to have taken a call from party headquarters. It seems like the illegal alien question tends to hurt democrats. After doing absolutely nothing about illegal immigration in Oregon, in fact actually aiding and abetting the invasion by handing out drivers licenses to illegals and prohibiting the police from being involved in immigration, the governor signed an executive order requiring some kind of proof of citizenship to get a drivers license. Your social security number should match. What a concept! The 175,000 illegal aliens we have now might be inconvenienced but the democratic party machine might be inconvenienced even more.
So Hillary gave straight forward answer to the question. She said “no”. She is against giving drivers licenses to illegal aliens. At least until she is in the White House, at which time I suspect we will again have a comprehensive immigration amnesty plan. Actually if the Republicans nominate the male version of Hillary, Rudolph Giuliani , we will still have a comprehensive amnesty invasion. They both have more immigration positions than a fresh caught trout. If the press would ask Hillary and Rudy more questions about NAFTA and their positions on gun rights it ought to get real interesting. You could see some synchronized flip flopping. It might become an Olympic event.
I would rather have a rattlesnake as a room mate in my house than either one of them as president in the White House.
I always say ballots before bullets but Tom Jefferson kept his options open.
***As a note, I spell check and paragraph these guest posts, I do not mess with them***
By Steve Culley
The most amazing thing came out of the democratic debate in Las Vegas. When asked, “do you favor driver’s licenses for illegal aliens?”, Hillary Clinton gave a very concise “no” answer.
A little background is in order to illuminate why this answer shows that even though you might think you are wasting your time being an activists you can change the world or at least the course of national history. As some who pay a little bit of attention might recall, we had a great big immigration fight last spring in congress over open borders George’s proposal to legalize the invasion of this country. I referred to it as “comprehensive amnesty” while GWB and the democrats referred to it as “comprehensive immigration reform” so the illegal, undocumented, aliens could come out of the shadows and do jobs Americans won’t do, because they just want to feed their families, and no person is illegal, so they can go to the back of the line and apply for citizenship, before they petition the rest of their family to come too, while the Minute Men, Oregonians for Immigration Reform, Numbers USA and a host of others called it by the true name of invasion while democrats assured us we need to celebrate diversity because we are a nation of immigrants and it is really Mexican territory anyway and yada yada yada to quote Seinfeld.
It was a dog and pony show with the corporate globalist using all the spin they could to convince the average Joe that what’s good for big business is good for him, even if it means outsourcing his job while importing someone who will compete for his new lower paying one. And some might have noticed that the democrats formed a symbiotic relationship with open borders George. You couldn’t slide a piece of paper between them and GWB. Almost all of them were stuck like glue to George. Makes me wonder why people still think they actually don’t like George. GWB is the best president Mexico ever had and the democrats in the senate are the best senators Mexico ever had. Chief among them was Hillary Clinton, all for a path to citizenship, no border fences, quit harassing illegals by raids, easy voter registration etc. Then two weeks ago she was asked about New York governor Elliot Spitzer’s attempt to give out the same drivers licenses to illegal aliens as citizens and she was all for it. That was before Luo Dobbs lead the charge against it and there was serious talk of recalling Spitzer. Hillary’s poll numbers started to drop like a rock and she flip flopped for a week before the Clinton machine turned up the heat on the poor governor and he pulled his proposal. Hillary is now a tough on illegal aliens gal.
Seems like the democrats and Hillary got the message. Americans are fed up with the corporate sanctioned invasion of this country. Illegal immigration is an issue whether the mainstream media wants to acknowledge it or not. Oregon will hold a primary election too and our governor seems to have taken a call from party headquarters. It seems like the illegal alien question tends to hurt democrats. After doing absolutely nothing about illegal immigration in Oregon, in fact actually aiding and abetting the invasion by handing out drivers licenses to illegals and prohibiting the police from being involved in immigration, the governor signed an executive order requiring some kind of proof of citizenship to get a drivers license. Your social security number should match. What a concept! The 175,000 illegal aliens we have now might be inconvenienced but the democratic party machine might be inconvenienced even more.
So Hillary gave straight forward answer to the question. She said “no”. She is against giving drivers licenses to illegal aliens. At least until she is in the White House, at which time I suspect we will again have a comprehensive immigration amnesty plan. Actually if the Republicans nominate the male version of Hillary, Rudolph Giuliani , we will still have a comprehensive amnesty invasion. They both have more immigration positions than a fresh caught trout. If the press would ask Hillary and Rudy more questions about NAFTA and their positions on gun rights it ought to get real interesting. You could see some synchronized flip flopping. It might become an Olympic event.
I would rather have a rattlesnake as a room mate in my house than either one of them as president in the White House.
I always say ballots before bullets but Tom Jefferson kept his options open.
***As a note, I spell check and paragraph these guest posts, I do not mess with them***
Saturday, August 18, 2007
Killing America
Steve Culley
August 5th, 2007
I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen president George Bush go on television and argue for some new domestic spying law that he desperately needs to “keep Americans safe” from Al Qaeda or Islamic fascist. Always what he asks for is just another little bit of police state that chips away at the Bill Of Rights and Constitution. His requests are usually endorsed and touted by the political right like Bill Oreilly and Sean Hannity and acquiesced too by democrats in congress because they know that in the present political climate that if another 9 11 type attack happened anyone who didn’t vote to give George Bush the “tools he needed” to stop terrorism would soon be out of a job.
All of this reflects the sorry state of American patriotism we have today. Nobody in the mainstream media or for that matter few in the blogosphere seem to be able to distinguish between killing Americans and killing America. They are two different things.
Bin Laden killed Americans on 9 11. The communists killed Americans in Viet Nam and Korea. Nazis killed Americans in Europe and Africa and Japanese militarism killed Americans in the Pacific. Germans killed Americans during World War One. Spain killed Americans during the Spanish American War. Americans killed Americans during our Civil War. The British killed Americans during the War of 1812. The very first Americans to die in war were those Minute Men who stood on the greens at Lexington and Concord to be killed by the most power army in the world, the British empire. That’s when we started to think of ourselves as Americans. Americans died but America was born.
And what is an American? Is it people who live inside a certain geographical boundary? Yes we do or should have borders and a history and a tradition and unique laws. That is part of being American. Americans are the heirs of brave and involved people who decided they would pay the price of being free. You can live in America but America lives in Americans.
I say killing Americans is not the same as killing America. America is an idea that was spawned at those village greens where a “shot heard around the world” was fired. America is an idea. Something that came down from heaven in my view. It’s a simple idea. That common men can run their own affairs without the benefit of royal leaders born with the right to rule. The American way is one of independence from state and for that matter from each other. We might cooperate for the common good in some things like a national defense, some book keeping things for business like trade deals and such and in laws that ensure the rights of individuals against the state and the tyranny of majority rule. A republic if you will.
After the constitutional convention, where Ben Franklin, had looked at a carved wooden figure in the back of a chair of a sunrise or possibly sunset remarked to a man on the street, “what have you given us Mr. Franklin” said “ A republic if you can keep it”. Franklin, during the build up to the revolution that spawned the American idea also said that, “those who would give up essential liberties for a little security deserve neither”.
And now 200 and some years later here we are again. Giving up essential liberty so Americans don’t die even if it means America might die.
There was a time when slogans meant something and were understood by a large portion of the population. “don’t tread on me” , “live free or die”, “better dead than red”. American ideas. The idea that life isn’t so precious that we would slowly give our freedoms and condemn our children and grand children to lives of servitude and bondage just to stay alive.
Who’s killing America? Bin Laden? No it’s the politicians and pundits and lazy media news editors who argue for a tough anti terrorism laws even if it’s un-American. It’s the far left that tries to disarm the common man, those men who pledged to be ready in one minute, the Minute Men, who met the British on the Village green, the militia, the common armed man, long before any concept of a national guard who the left wing says are the sole people who have the right to keep and bear arms. Judges who are globalists before they are American who hand out rights to foreigners who arrived yesterday, illegally who never bothered to fight their own revolutions and the real anti Americans, those Americans who reap the benefits of being American but could not tell you anything about Lexington and Concord, The battle of New Orleans, Belleau Woods, Normandy, Iowa Jima, Bastogne, Inchon, Khe Sahn, The Gulf or for that matter Iraq and Afghanistan today. The far right pundit who argues for blind loyalty to a president and the politician who fails to stand up and say’ “ If I vote for this bill it will give the federal government the ability to spy on our enemies, but it will also give the federal government the right to spy on you. It might save your life but there is an equal possibility that it makes you part of a police state. Therefore I will not vote for it. You might die in an Islamic explosion but you will die American. You will die free and America, the idea will live.”
We are 300 million. How many could we lose and still be American? If one person is left who understands what America is, or was, then America lives. But if a majority votes away freedoms to be safe, then America is dead and gone.
August 5th, 2007
I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve seen president George Bush go on television and argue for some new domestic spying law that he desperately needs to “keep Americans safe” from Al Qaeda or Islamic fascist. Always what he asks for is just another little bit of police state that chips away at the Bill Of Rights and Constitution. His requests are usually endorsed and touted by the political right like Bill Oreilly and Sean Hannity and acquiesced too by democrats in congress because they know that in the present political climate that if another 9 11 type attack happened anyone who didn’t vote to give George Bush the “tools he needed” to stop terrorism would soon be out of a job.
All of this reflects the sorry state of American patriotism we have today. Nobody in the mainstream media or for that matter few in the blogosphere seem to be able to distinguish between killing Americans and killing America. They are two different things.
Bin Laden killed Americans on 9 11. The communists killed Americans in Viet Nam and Korea. Nazis killed Americans in Europe and Africa and Japanese militarism killed Americans in the Pacific. Germans killed Americans during World War One. Spain killed Americans during the Spanish American War. Americans killed Americans during our Civil War. The British killed Americans during the War of 1812. The very first Americans to die in war were those Minute Men who stood on the greens at Lexington and Concord to be killed by the most power army in the world, the British empire. That’s when we started to think of ourselves as Americans. Americans died but America was born.
And what is an American? Is it people who live inside a certain geographical boundary? Yes we do or should have borders and a history and a tradition and unique laws. That is part of being American. Americans are the heirs of brave and involved people who decided they would pay the price of being free. You can live in America but America lives in Americans.
I say killing Americans is not the same as killing America. America is an idea that was spawned at those village greens where a “shot heard around the world” was fired. America is an idea. Something that came down from heaven in my view. It’s a simple idea. That common men can run their own affairs without the benefit of royal leaders born with the right to rule. The American way is one of independence from state and for that matter from each other. We might cooperate for the common good in some things like a national defense, some book keeping things for business like trade deals and such and in laws that ensure the rights of individuals against the state and the tyranny of majority rule. A republic if you will.
After the constitutional convention, where Ben Franklin, had looked at a carved wooden figure in the back of a chair of a sunrise or possibly sunset remarked to a man on the street, “what have you given us Mr. Franklin” said “ A republic if you can keep it”. Franklin, during the build up to the revolution that spawned the American idea also said that, “those who would give up essential liberties for a little security deserve neither”.
And now 200 and some years later here we are again. Giving up essential liberty so Americans don’t die even if it means America might die.
There was a time when slogans meant something and were understood by a large portion of the population. “don’t tread on me” , “live free or die”, “better dead than red”. American ideas. The idea that life isn’t so precious that we would slowly give our freedoms and condemn our children and grand children to lives of servitude and bondage just to stay alive.
Who’s killing America? Bin Laden? No it’s the politicians and pundits and lazy media news editors who argue for a tough anti terrorism laws even if it’s un-American. It’s the far left that tries to disarm the common man, those men who pledged to be ready in one minute, the Minute Men, who met the British on the Village green, the militia, the common armed man, long before any concept of a national guard who the left wing says are the sole people who have the right to keep and bear arms. Judges who are globalists before they are American who hand out rights to foreigners who arrived yesterday, illegally who never bothered to fight their own revolutions and the real anti Americans, those Americans who reap the benefits of being American but could not tell you anything about Lexington and Concord, The battle of New Orleans, Belleau Woods, Normandy, Iowa Jima, Bastogne, Inchon, Khe Sahn, The Gulf or for that matter Iraq and Afghanistan today. The far right pundit who argues for blind loyalty to a president and the politician who fails to stand up and say’ “ If I vote for this bill it will give the federal government the ability to spy on our enemies, but it will also give the federal government the right to spy on you. It might save your life but there is an equal possibility that it makes you part of a police state. Therefore I will not vote for it. You might die in an Islamic explosion but you will die American. You will die free and America, the idea will live.”
We are 300 million. How many could we lose and still be American? If one person is left who understands what America is, or was, then America lives. But if a majority votes away freedoms to be safe, then America is dead and gone.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Blue Thumbs
*by Steve Culley*
Saddam Hussein was a scum bag dictator and having him depart this earth was a good thing. Of course some things happened when he did. Iraq, a creation of imperialism ceased to exist except on a map and in the minds of George Bush and other ill informed people. An artificial nation of warring factions lost the glue that held it together. Right after we invaded it might have been possible to create some kind of federation among Sunnis, Shia and Kurds but that opportunity was squandered. I hate to say it but the natural order of things, the separation of those factions will happen. Iraq is dead, thrown on the garbage dump of history. The natural order of things there will sort themselves out.
The process is called civil war. There is not a dammed thing we can do about it. The only thing left is a Viet Nam rerun. Presidential speech writers are smart enough not to let George Bush use terms like “a light at the end of the tunnel” or “winning hearts and minds” but they are stuck in the same Viet Nam rut. The only thing left, although it won’t be phrased in Viet Nam era lingo is “peace with honor” and declaring victory and leaving. That’s the last step before withdrawal.
Iraqi prime minister Nouri al Maliki opened the gate to that Saturday when he said , “We say in full confidence we are able, God willing, to take the responsibility completely in running the security file if the international forces withdraw at any time they want”.
There were elections in Iraq and the Bush administration made a lot of hay with those photos of voter blue thumbs showing their new democracy. I say put it to the test. Let’s push hard for a cease fire among those people who like to slaughter each other so as to have a “national” referendum in Iraq with just one question. “Should the Americans and coalition forces stay or depart from Iraq?”
Right after that the Television news could show lots of Americans waving back at a lot of Iraqis waving blue thumbs as we get on the boats and airplanes. Then they can get down the business of either settling their differences, by ballot or bullet. The choice would be theirs. Then we could redeploy our forces to our borders where the security of our nation is truly at risk.
Saddam Hussein was a scum bag dictator and having him depart this earth was a good thing. Of course some things happened when he did. Iraq, a creation of imperialism ceased to exist except on a map and in the minds of George Bush and other ill informed people. An artificial nation of warring factions lost the glue that held it together. Right after we invaded it might have been possible to create some kind of federation among Sunnis, Shia and Kurds but that opportunity was squandered. I hate to say it but the natural order of things, the separation of those factions will happen. Iraq is dead, thrown on the garbage dump of history. The natural order of things there will sort themselves out.
The process is called civil war. There is not a dammed thing we can do about it. The only thing left is a Viet Nam rerun. Presidential speech writers are smart enough not to let George Bush use terms like “a light at the end of the tunnel” or “winning hearts and minds” but they are stuck in the same Viet Nam rut. The only thing left, although it won’t be phrased in Viet Nam era lingo is “peace with honor” and declaring victory and leaving. That’s the last step before withdrawal.
Iraqi prime minister Nouri al Maliki opened the gate to that Saturday when he said , “We say in full confidence we are able, God willing, to take the responsibility completely in running the security file if the international forces withdraw at any time they want”.
There were elections in Iraq and the Bush administration made a lot of hay with those photos of voter blue thumbs showing their new democracy. I say put it to the test. Let’s push hard for a cease fire among those people who like to slaughter each other so as to have a “national” referendum in Iraq with just one question. “Should the Americans and coalition forces stay or depart from Iraq?”
Right after that the Television news could show lots of Americans waving back at a lot of Iraqis waving blue thumbs as we get on the boats and airplanes. Then they can get down the business of either settling their differences, by ballot or bullet. The choice would be theirs. Then we could redeploy our forces to our borders where the security of our nation is truly at risk.
Monday, July 09, 2007
Truth in Editorial Writing
*Steve Culley is a friend of mine and sometimes offers me articles and sometimes I use them, whether they reflect my views or not, since they address something that needs discussion*
I think it’s time we had a truth in editorial writing law. One aspect of this law could be the substitution of “Population increase” for such terms as “immigration” Guest workers” or “refugees.”
I predicted several months ago that the turmoil in the middle east would eventually end up as a call to let in more “refugees”. The Oregon today, Monday, July 9th, called for the first 70,000 Iraqi “refugees”. The Capitol Press is pushing an “ag jobs” bill and of course “immigrants” still stream across our borders.
Keeping in mind that problems such as the Klamath basin water problems, salmon kills on the Columbia River, dirty air in our cities, crowded freeways, paving of farm land, destruction of wildlife habitat, mercury in the water, species extinction, over cutting of forests, green house gasses, shortages of electricity, gasoline or a long list of what many people call environmental problems are a direct function of the things we have to do to the environment to feed, cloth and house people. It stands to reason that the more people you have means an increase in these problems.
There fore I propose that editors and pundits substitute “population increase” whenever they refer to “immigrants“, “guest workers” or “refugees“ When ever environmental groups talk about land use laws, regulations protecting the environment, restricting private property rights, saving farm land, forests and rivers and open space they could refer to and clarify why all the problems exist in the first place. A good editorial should start off,….” since we have a national policy of constant, rapid, never ending population increases because of “immigration” , ”guest workers” and “refugees” we need to modify away hard won land use rights. Or “since we have too many people and are adding more “refugees” “guest workers” and “immigrants” and swelling the population we are going to have to ban ATV’s, only permit river rafting for some, restrict country living cut back on gas use, electricity, recycle and more stuff. The list is endless of the freedoms and quality of life you might have to give up is endless to accommodate all the new people but that’s just the way it is.
Maybe some inconvenient truths could emerge and then maybe a true discussion on how to save the world solution could get under way.
Steve Culley
I think it’s time we had a truth in editorial writing law. One aspect of this law could be the substitution of “Population increase” for such terms as “immigration” Guest workers” or “refugees.”
I predicted several months ago that the turmoil in the middle east would eventually end up as a call to let in more “refugees”. The Oregon today, Monday, July 9th, called for the first 70,000 Iraqi “refugees”. The Capitol Press is pushing an “ag jobs” bill and of course “immigrants” still stream across our borders.
Keeping in mind that problems such as the Klamath basin water problems, salmon kills on the Columbia River, dirty air in our cities, crowded freeways, paving of farm land, destruction of wildlife habitat, mercury in the water, species extinction, over cutting of forests, green house gasses, shortages of electricity, gasoline or a long list of what many people call environmental problems are a direct function of the things we have to do to the environment to feed, cloth and house people. It stands to reason that the more people you have means an increase in these problems.
There fore I propose that editors and pundits substitute “population increase” whenever they refer to “immigrants“, “guest workers” or “refugees“ When ever environmental groups talk about land use laws, regulations protecting the environment, restricting private property rights, saving farm land, forests and rivers and open space they could refer to and clarify why all the problems exist in the first place. A good editorial should start off,….” since we have a national policy of constant, rapid, never ending population increases because of “immigration” , ”guest workers” and “refugees” we need to modify away hard won land use rights. Or “since we have too many people and are adding more “refugees” “guest workers” and “immigrants” and swelling the population we are going to have to ban ATV’s, only permit river rafting for some, restrict country living cut back on gas use, electricity, recycle and more stuff. The list is endless of the freedoms and quality of life you might have to give up is endless to accommodate all the new people but that’s just the way it is.
Maybe some inconvenient truths could emerge and then maybe a true discussion on how to save the world solution could get under way.
Steve Culley
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)