You may find yourself saying "This is not my beautiful car. This is not my beautiful wife. This is not the Change I Can Believe In..."
That does it. I’m burning the Obama cap I got at the Democratic Convention. The man has lost his mind.
(White House) WASHINGTON – Today, President Barack Obama announced his intent to nominate the following individuals to key administration posts:
- Elisabeth Hagen, Under Secretary of Agriculture for Food Safety, Department of Agriculture
- Michele M. Leonhart, Administrator of Drug Enforcement, Drug Enforcement Administration, Department of Justice
President Obama said, “The skill and dedication of these individuals will make them valued additions to my administration, and I look forward to working with them in the coming months and years.”
Michele M. Leonhart has nearly 30 years of experience as a Special Agent with the Drug Enforcement Administration. She was unanimously confirmed by the Senate to serve as DEA Deputy Administrator and became the Acting Administrator in 2007.
Anyone remember Candidate Obama talking about the Change We Can Believe In from the Bush Administration in regards to science?
(TPM) “My administration will value science,” Obama said, in what sounded like a pointed reference to his predecessor. “We will make decisions based on facts.”
With the appointment of Leonhart, we can forget about science and facts having any bearing on the actions of the Drug Enforcement Administration. For example, it is a fact that more Mexicans have been killed in the drug war in two years than Americans who have died in 9/11, Iraq, and Afghanistan combined and that death toll is directly attributable to American demand for marijuana we’re more than willing to grow for ourselves. Yet Michele Leonhart thinks piled up bodies of Mexican citizens and cops is a success:
(Stash) “Our view is that the violence we have been seeing is a signpost of the success our very courageous Mexican counterparts are having,” said Michele Leonhart, acting DEA administrator. “The cartels are acting out like caged animals, because they are caged animals.”
Leonhart also seems to have made a science out of wasting taxpayer dollars:
WASHINGTON — The head of the Drug Enforcement Administration spent more than $123,000 to charter a private jet to fly to Bogota, Colombia, last fall instead of taking one of the agency’s 106 planes.
When reputable scientists, backed by a finding of fact by the DEA’s own administrative law judge, apply to the DEA to study the medical efficacy of cannabis, Leonhart runs out the clock, delays, impedes, and finally rejects any attempt to value science and make decisions based on the facts.
(Stash) Professor Craker’s petition was rejected despite the opinion of DEA ALJ Bittner that granting Craker a license to grow marijuana “would be in the public interest.” Judge Bittner issued a comprehensive, 88-page nonbinding recommendation to DEA Deputy Administrator Michele Leonhart on February 12, 2007, following nine days of hearings, testimony and evidence presented by the ACLU and others on both sides of the issue.
While I’m happy about the Obama doctrine of not using federal resources to go after states following their medical marijuana laws, I still worry about such a die-hard drug war ideologue running the DEA. Maybe Obama had to go with Leonhart because nobody else would take the job anymore.
Loading ...
I see Karri’s changed her profile picture recently.
Fair enough. It’s a difficult balance to strike and you do an impressive job in finding it. I think your strategy, “The “hate-the-man” stakeholders can look at me and know I’m one of them and the “hate-the-hippies” types can read my words and realize they’d wrongly judged the book by the cover.” is a sensible and effective one. Only thing is, though, how many of the ‘hate the man’ types manage to cling to their values beyond the age of thirty? Yeah, sure, there are plenty, but is it really such a good idea to appease them? In their heart of hearts, I suspect, they might prefer you didn’t.
Not that I’d bring it up, but while we’re on the topic, one more thing I would point out about that particular picture is that it really doesn’t fit the image of you live. I’m not sure how to put this tactfully, so I’ll just come straight out with it: it looks as if you’re hanging onto an old photo because you’re afraid a more recent one might highlight some aspects of ageing which you’re not altogether happy about. You look more mature now than you were in the profile picture. That’s not such a bad thing. I shouldn’t think many people have gone off Cheech and Chong just because they’re not in their twenties anymore, although that was their heyday.
Point taken. But I’m not changing my look. There are plenty of folks in reform who have the “square” look down far more than I’ll be able to achieve. I am the bridge between the way-stony-lookin’ stakeholders in marijuana reform and the way-square-lookin’ folks with the money and connections. The “hate-the-man” stakeholders can look at me and know I’m one of them and the “hate-the-hippies” types can read my words and realize they’d wrongly judged the book by the cover.
Besides, I’m a radio guy – who cares what I look like?
“And he does have a point, Russ, however difficult he may find it to express himself tactfully. Now, please don’t take offence. I thoroughly enjoy your show and take no offence whatsoever to your image. The 64×64 profile icon, however… It may have been more appropriate to a time gone by when legalisation seemed pie in the sky and years away. Perhaps it IS time to give it another thought? Hell, you can’t even get a passport with a photo any more than six months old. Maybe the time’s come to have another picture made?”
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Well put. This was my original point of posting. Have a Panhead day out there. – kp
Don’t take it to heart, Russ. As you point out, you really need to bear in mind who’s making this comment. Talk about kettle calling pot black!
Just out of interest, I clicked on that poster’s name (Kirk Perry) to have a quick gander at who’s talking. Perhaps I should apologize for being an old-fashioned, anal-retentive type of cowardly pussy, but I just can’t take the arguments of people who build lifestyles around deliberately offensive images, e.g. German military crosses, knives, blood, death, skulls, etc. seriously. And I have this thing about tattoos. I know they’re the height of fashion at the moment with intellectual giants, such as football stars, joining the ranks of avant-garde social revolutionaries, such as motorcycle gangs, but I just can’t get over my unjustified association of tattoos with nasty people, e.g. prisoners and bitter old mariners who have probably never enjoyed an intimate sexual relationship. (Would you like to have one lying next to you? How about on top of you?!) The day my kids come home with a tattoo (or a piercing) is the day they leave home for good.
Something interesting cropped up at this site, which I’ve only seen once or twice before in all my Internet adventures: when I tried to copy the text below, this message popped up,
“The page at http://www.hellsangelsventura.com says:
Access Denied – Property of the Hells Angels.”
and I wasn’t able to put the text into the paste buffer. So, I manually typed out the text. It’s not difficult for me. I’m quite good at the keyboard, even though I still, at forty-five years old, haven’t learnt to ride a motorcycle.
Not that I wouldn’t have loved to. I spent a long time as an older teenager and younger man fantasizing about having a bike. It’s just one of those young men’s dreams which didn’t come together, but a lot of other ones have and I’m now very glad things have worked out as they have. I love cycling; always have.That’s one of the main reasons why Holland is my favourite place to spend my free time. But that’s beside the point.
The point is, getting back to it, that I wouldn’t have thought the Hell’s Angels’ philosophy, whatever it may be, would be easily reconciled to money-grubbing, greedy, possessive, petty, little gestures, like denying access to copy and paste functions on websites. OK, not many people would mistake Hell’s Angels for Hippies, but you know what I mean? As you say, Russ, “Sheesh” (Personally I’d prefer to use rather a more forceful expletive here, but you’ve got an image to maintain.) talk about petty!
Anyway, here’s the description Hell’s Angels post about themselves:
“Allegations of murder, explosives, weapons, assault, mayhem, arson, racketeering, drugs, gambling, theft, conspiracy and traffic tickets we lost count of in the early eighties. This has made us who we are – Hells Angels Ventura. “
Sheesh, I don’t know… I can’t help feeling most people would take more kindly to a guy in dark glasses with a silly hat on and something cylindrical in his hand than psuedo-retro, monochrome pictures of people, who generally look pretty unhappy, taking threatening poses, making threatening gestures and showing off tattoos. But, hey, let’s not labour the point. The guy writes well – good spelling, grammar, etc. – so let’s not dismiss his point out of hand.
And he does have a point, Russ, however difficult he may find it to express himself tactfully. Now, please don’t take offence. I thoroughly enjoy your show and take no offence whatsoever to your image. The 64×64 profile icon, however… It may have been more appropriate to a time gone by when legalisation seemed pie in the sky and years away. Perhaps it IS time to give it another thought? Hell, you can’t even get a passport with a photo any more than six months old. Maybe the time’s come to have another picture made?
You got me. The ONDCP is paying me to make us all look bad.
It’s a pageboy cap, not a “do-rag” or “turban”. It’s a four gram joint, not “rolled up dollar bills”.
Tune into my show sometime… the one where I am wearing a tie 96% of the time and a suit jacket 35% of the time.
Sheesh, all this over a 64×64 profile icon. From a guy posting from “Hells Angels Ventura”.
What’s with Russ Belville’s look?
This is an election year. Lose the “do-rag” MJ leaf turban.
Are you sure Russ wasn’t mugged-up as a prohibitionist plant?
One look at Russ’s get-up with the rolled up dollar bills ready to smoke.
Whaddya nuts Russ?
Change your shirt, take off your sunglasses and look like you might be trusted.
Your “look” plays right into the Prohib’s character-mold. Thanks for nothing.
[...] NEWS] Bad News: Science ignored again as President Obama nominates Bush DEA’s Michele Leonhart to head the DEA. [...]
“I just dont know if I can spend the second half of my short life living in fear…”
Unless you’re thinking of the Netherlands or know about somewhere else like that, I don’t think you’ll find life any less fearful anywhere else.
I’ve been fortunate enough to spend some time in Holland, so I can relate to your aversion to fear, because I know what it’s like to live without it. A couple years ago I managed to spend a month just outside of Amsterdam. It was truly a life-changing experience. I remember walking down the street one day with a couple of grams in my polo-shirt breast pocket and realising it was OK. I was like everyone else – not a criminal and with no need to fear anyone asking me what was in my breast pocket. What’s more, I wasn’t really too worried about it dropping out and getting lost, because I knew it would only be an insignificant inconvenience – I’d just go and get some more. It was a liberating experience, realising the extent to which my life had so far been led in subterfuge, harbouring guilt about being ‘different’.
Presumably, we share similar opinions about homosexuality – although I’m not Catholic, I agree with the church’s position on this issue – that it should be controlled by the individual and not virtually encouraged, so I probably share more of your views about the current ‘New-and-improved-World’ state of American society. However, I must say, when I realised how my life had been restricted by cannabis prohibition – on the street in Amstelveen that day – I understood why homosexuals feel so much better about themselves when they eventually manage to ‘come out of the closet’: I felt OK about something about myself which I had never really felt OK about before. It was a wonderfully life-changing feeling of relief and self-acceptance. I can’t recommend it highly enough. It really is a human rights issue.
What I can’t understand is why my need for cannabis makes me worse than another man’s need for another man. (Well, actually, I do understand this, but it’s not within the scope of this reply.) What makes them better than me? Why can they have what they need, but I can’t? I’ve got four healthy, loving kids from a stable, long-term marriage which is still going strong. (I don’t think we’ll have any more kids, though.) Surely, I’ve been productive enough with my life so far to determine what I need to maintain the balance I’ve managed to strike to get me to where I am? I suppose the prohibitionists would say, ‘Ah, but yes, you see, if cannabis had been more easily accessible, you probably wouldn’t have managed to get what you’ve got out of life.’ Yeah, right – what a convenient argument for them! Isn’t that something like saying, ‘Ah, yes, but you see, if I’d had access to and been properly trained in the use of phytocannabinoids, I probably wouldn’t have got cancer.’ (I don’t have cancer.) It’s the same argument, isn’t it? We’ll never know. So put that in your pipe and smoke it!
Those past couple of paragraphs may be a bit off-topic, but I want you to understand, as I’ve already stated, “…I can relate to your aversion to fear…”Few things more effectively ruin the quality of life – maybe hunger and pain – than fear. Unlike hunger and pain, fear might never be recognised, only leading to a confused depression-like misunderstanding and self-loathing which in some ways can sometimes be even more debilitating than pain and/or hunger.
“I truly am wondering if moving out of the country wont be the best bet for me and my family.”
It might be, but if you’re doing it because you think you might find access to cannabis less problematic, with the notable exception of the Netherlands (God, I love that country!) you may be disappointed.
My favourite report on cannabis, which is both recent and intelligent – a damn good read, ‘The Global Cannabis Commission Report’ by ‘The Beckley Foundation’ http://www.beckleyfoundation.org/policy/cannabis_commission.html describes the situation thus:
page 90-91
“The International System And National And Local Laws
In its self-conscious role as the “guardian of the conventions” (Bewley-Taylor & Trace, 2006), the INCB periodically mounts the ramparts on cannabis in defense of the system, for instance by issuing an admonitory press release (UNIS, 2008) in response to press reports of experiments with computerized vending machines by California dispensaries for medical cannabis to be used in accordance with a doctor’s letter. A prominent feature of the international drug control system, in fact, is the extensiveness and detail of its concerns with domestic matters in nations which are parties to the treaties. It was a common experience for national delegations to return from international drug treaty conferences with the news that amendment of domestic legislation would be required by the new treaty. The level of control over domestic decisions to which the system aspires exceeds, for instance, the level of ambition of the European Union to control national arrangements in the same areas (e.g. concerning the Dutch “coffee shops” for cannabis), or the power of national governments in federal states to control state or provincial matters (e.g. concerning medical marijuana availability in California and other US states). In addition to mandating controls on markets in psychoactive substances, the conventions require criminalization of the drug user, if and when the user is in possession of substances that have not been legally obtained. This is an unusually strong requirement even in the context of national laws on contraband commodities, let alone as a requirement of parties to an international treaty; there was no such provision, for instance, in the US alcohol Prohibition laws. The 1961 Convention includes specific provisions that possession of cannabis and other substances controlled by the Convention without legal authority shall not be permitted, and
91
that, where constitutionally allowed, it shall be a punishable offence. As noted, the 1988 Convention adds the requirement that possession must be made a criminal offence.”
page 170
“The international drug control conventions have served as a limit on the outer boundary of policy initiatives on decriminalization and legalization. No country which acceded to the Conventions has ever withdrawn from them. To our knowledge, no country has legalized the growing, processing or wholesaling of cannabis, except in restricted circumstances as a medication. The Swiss authorities have moved in this direction at least twice, but so far it has proved politically impossible. No country has formally legalized retail sale, although the Netherlands has done so in a de-facto way, to the continuing displeasure and disapproval of its neighbours and the guardians of the international drug control system. Numerous instances can be found where policy initiatives on cannabis were restrained by appeals to the international conventions. In the meantime, we have cited evidence that the international control system has become more rigid and impervious to change; there is frequent reference to the argument that any relaxation of the status quo would “send the wrong message”.”
page 174
“Effectively the conventions restrict the ability of signatory countries to adopt cannabis policies and laws which are driven by evidence.”
As long as these conventions are in effect, there can be no freedom anywhere in the world. Except for rogue nations, all countries are signatories to these conventions. Were you thinking of moving to North Korea? I don’t know whether it’s a signatory or not. There are some government-authorised bhang shops in India, but the material standard of living there might be a bit difficult to get used to. Back to square one: that just leaves the Netherlands. Yes, it’s a wonderful country.
But America is a wonderful country, as well. One of the most positive things my parents were always commenting on when we lived there is how the Americans deal with problems. We tend to drag our feet in Europe and hope a solution somehow drops out of the sky. We do a lot of waiting. Not so in the States: when there’s a problem, there’ll be someone onto it. They deal with things much more quickly and efficiently there. This cannabis problem (And it is a problem, not a ‘challenge’.) has dogged the States for an uncharacteristically long time. With the UN effectively under US control, with a degree of influence exerted by the UK and other amenable interests, (the US/UN/UK Axis, around which the New-and-improved-World revolves) there can be little question that any resolution to ‘the cannabis issue’ can only be resolved by the US. So, running away from it probably won’t do you much good in the long run.
There was another comment in response to this article with a link to the GOOOH site. I watched those videos and thought, ‘What a good example of how the Americans take bulls by horns and wrestle them to the ground.’ This is the attitude I describe above. Watch the videos. They’re interesting.
In the State of Union Obama talked about science and the all the money the feds are wasting but the War on Drugs was never mentioned! Freakin poltics
Well Im not taking this news very well, i wrote a two page piece about this and how this just holds us back from any real national change for another 10 years. And proves we may be further away from full legal weed than many want to admit. Im very concerned and as a whole I have little faith our country will get out off all these messes we are in, including the Drug war anytime soon!
I about ready to throw in the towel when it comes to the USA all together anyhow, healthcare , education, race/gay issues, border issues, Wars, you name it we have problems. I just dont know if I can spend the second half of my short life living in fear Like I have the first half. I truly am wondering if moving out of the country wont be the best bet for me and my family. Only time will tell, I just dont know how much more time one can give when such issues are closing in around you!
This just shows me that even with all the progress over this past year, we still are very far away from any true change in our drug laws. As for my state, its going to take a national level event to change what we are doing here, and I cant see it happening in my lifetime, when they appoint people that will continue down the same path over and over, where is the change, there isn’t any folks its a scam!
Ah! gotchya. Bureaucracy can be a little redundant eh?
No, Gil is “Drug Czar”, Michele is “Head of DEA”. One’s government, one’s cops.
So wait. No more Gil?
They’re not aiming for the middle of the road. They’re aiming the same place they’ve been aiming for decades. Color me unsurprised. Don’t you see how much Obama’s positions fit Bush’s platform? All he is doing is paving the way for his corporate buddies to have their way with us.
He wants to control it like morphine. If they acknowledge its medicinal properties and reschedule it to Schedule II and start selling it from pharmacies, suddenly petty pot smokers will be guilty of “manufacturing pharmaceuticals” and “unlawful possession of prescription medication.” That is, unless you’re a rich petty pot smoker.
What ever happened to “I think our marijuana laws need to be decriminalized.”? It gave way to “I don’t know what that says about the online community.” This is just silly. This is no better than evangelicals being led to the polls by the “pro-life” carrot on a stick to vote for the next thief who gets the pro life message right.
Now… just for a minute… consider that these are just people… like you and me… wearing suits and running our lives from a little place on the east coast. They don’t know us. They’ve never met us, yet somehow they know what’s best for us.
The funny thing is that people still believe in America. It is a mythical thing, isn’t it?
The ‘Power’ is in the process of being returned to the people. Eliminating corporate owned politicians. It’s being done. Check out ‘Get Out Of Our House’. Take 30 minutes, go here (www.GoooH.com) and watch the short videos (consecutively). You may doubt it, but only until you understand it!
“If ever a time should come, when vain and aspiring men shall possess the highest seats in Government, our country will stand in need of its experienced patriots to prevent its ruin.” Samuel Adams, 1776
Agreed Negatron!
Hate to say it but I think that Obama is still the best option for decrim/legalization in 2012 his 2nd term when he has nothing to lose. We are kidding ourselves if we think Obama actually controls the government to its full extent. Corporations and other private interest control the federal government and both of the 2 major political parties, not the people!! Until the American people as a whole realize the sham then nothing will change.
Mark my words, in pains me greatly to say this, but there probably will be a second American revolution (I hope on a platform of non-violence, but there is no such thing as a bloodless revolution). Enough Americans will get mad and figure out the sham that what is the point of having a central government that doesn´t listen to its citizens. Especially as the lower class gets bigger and the middle class shrinks. The American Dream is dead. We got close with this democracry created with ideas of our founding fathers, but it has been turned into a cluster fuck. But when all the feds do is fuck everyone over and the citizens benefit in no way from having a huge central federal beaucracy then what the hell is the point of it besides to screw the American people and give the rich the ability to profit without actually doing shit.
I must say that we were probably being extremely naive thinking that “change” under a democrat admin is JUST AS RIDICULOUS as expecting “change” out of a Republican admin. They are but two arms of the elite power structure that rules this land. There CANNOT be any change until we stop playing this two-party bullshit and start running the govt with officials elected on their actual merits rather than whoever can scrape together the most campaign funds.
With the new US Supreme Court decision that allows unlimited corporate campaign funding we are sure to see just how similar the Democrat and Republican party are.
Between that and the Govt spending freeze that Obama is supposed to announce on the State of the Union today, I’m sure we are the generation to witness the complete and overt conquest of our govt by the corporations.
Keith Olberman (spelling?) did some estimations using the avg cost of a senate campaign and found that it would only take a sum of money equal to MSNBC’s profit margin (i cant remember the exact figure he sited) to purchase the ENTIRE senate.
Meaning that it is within the relm of possibility that the pricetags of the ENTIRE legislature, the executive branch, and therefore the judicial branch, are all affordable to corporate interests.
It shouldn’t be long before we the the “Honorable Gentleman from Johnson and Johnson” or the “Honorable Gentleman from Chinese Overseas Shipping Co. (COSCO)” a chinese company…
Obama…should run her out of town……but no…let’s make her head of prohibition…..so, so disappointed.
No, there’s nothing new here. This is how it’s always been and is all over the world. It’s a fault in human nature to construct and perpetuate such political systems. That you believe there was once a time when it was different is an illusion.
Einstein was wrong, too: ‘The one thing failure can’t stand is persistence.’ Like the monkeys one fine day, over the course of countless generations, climbed down from the trees and walked on two legs, we too will move on to the next stage of evolution and everything we know now will seem painfully primitive. We’ll look back and say, ‘How amusing – fancy having actually lived like that!’
‘Patience is a virtue; possess it if you can…’
I wonder who the politicos have in mind for president in the next election. They’ve shown us how they do it. Get the public to dislike the current pres. Have him really fuck things over. Next, trot out somebody that promises to make changes for the better, then gets in, and his handlers tell him what to do, and how to do it. Promises be damned. We thought it couldn’t get any worse than George W. Then we’ll think the same thing about Obama. Makes me scared to think about who they’ll give us next.
Until the American public wakes up and smells the coffee, it’ll be same-o, same-o.
There was a time when the public at least had a choice between the lesser of two evils. Boy, I miss that.
“Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” Albert Einstein,
Why don’t you organise a letter template for people to send an e-mail to Obama outlining the points above, or give us a link to cut and paste some of the stuff above into a message for the White House?
Michele Leonhart was solely responsible for ordering raids on California dispensaries AFTER the announcement by Eric Holder and the Obama administration that such operations would cease. In addition, Obama’s vow to support scientific research is just another lie I believed in…it’s why I voted for him.
For all the encouragement I felt when we elected him to office, I can’t begin to express my disappointment in Obama’s actions since taking office. I feel true shame that I took him at his word.
He’s just another political bullshitter, and I hate that.
Well, she still needs to be confirmed by the Senate. Maybe the ire of jah nation can hold her up
This is exceedingly disappointing… This would be the reason why the Dems lost Ted Kennedy’s old seat. Aiming for the middle of the road rather than the stars…
I regret sending him a “thank you for promising to protect MMJ patient rights” message now.
of course this isn’t a huge surprise after watching “the obama deception.