Slashdot Mirror


US Open Government Initiative Enters Phase Three

circletimessquare writes "The Obama administration opened a discussion forum in January of this year which has become an electronic suggestion box. It is now entering stage three, following brainstorm and discussion phases: the draft phase, in which the top subject matter is codified into suggestions for the government. 'Ultimately, the visitors advanced more than 3,900 ideas, which in turn spawned 11,000 comments that received 210,000 thumb votes. The result? Three of the top 10 most popular ideas called for legalizing marijuana, and two featured conspiracy theories about Mr. Obama's true place of birth.'"

64 of 572 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Lol Democracy by Starlon · · Score: 3, Funny

    Don't knock democracy. It's the most efficient way out from under a tyrannical government.

    --
    Health Freedom is almost as popular as Freedom itself.
  2. Legalize it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Not sure if that's a brilliant idea or not, but surely removing it from schedule 1 status is the right thing to do.

    That Nixon-era policy makes classifies it as having "no medicinal value" and is considered "highly addictive". Both are jokes.

    The status above cocaine gives law enforcement more incentive to go after potheads than Colombian smugglers. Ridiculous.

    1. Re:Legalize it? by Starlon · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The Government's leading expert on marijuana says legalize it. He claims it causes less damage to society and health than both tobacco and alcohol. Look him up. His name's Dr. Donald Tashkin.

      --
      Health Freedom is almost as popular as Freedom itself.
    2. Re:Legalize it? by shaitand · · Score: 5, Informative

      Marijuana is a fairly safe herbal supplement with thousands of years of demonstrated safe use. By even the most exaggerated accounts it is less addictive than most cough syrups. The known side effects are less severe and occur with less frequency than over the counter medications like say Aspirin and many other herbal supplements.

      According to the FDA's own rules an herbal remedy with an established long term history of safe use should be unregulated right alongside all the other herbal supplements from the scam diet pills to those supported by clinical evidence like Ginko Biloba.

      There is no legitimate reason to make marijuana a black market product but there are plenty of illegitimate reasons.

    3. Re:Legalize it? by Starlon · · Score: 5, Informative

      He's a researcher at UCLA and has ran a government study over the course of 30+ years to conclude that marijuana does not cause cancer, and even possesses anti-cancer qualities. Cells die before they have a chance to mutate. The closest thing you'll get to his research is an interview with him on Youtube. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GJmQ16cGBHU&feature=player_embedded And you can see Dr. Tashkin's profile at the UCLA website. http://www.lung.med.ucla.edu/faculty/tashkin.htm He's America's leading expert into smoked marijuana, and he was employed to conduct this research by the US Government quite some years ago.

      --
      Health Freedom is almost as popular as Freedom itself.
    4. Re:Legalize it? by UncleTogie · · Score: 4, Informative

      I could not find anything to support your claim of Mr. Tashkin being a "government expert". Can you provide a citation for that claim?

      Sure, if you include the NIH! His name came up in multiple studies on pot when I entered his name in the search bar there. He's also referenced here in paragraph 8.

      --
      Don't tell me to get a life. I'm a gamer; I have LOTS of lives!
    5. Re:Legalize it? by Will.Woodhull · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Legalize it, then it can be taxed and regulated. We should strongly consider doing the same thing with other drugs, too. If drugs were legally available, there would be no profit in the illicit drug trade, we would see a reduction in crime at all levels, and the medical costs associated with overdoses and adulterated drugs would also decrease. Legalizing marajuana would be an excellent test case.

      Also, if marajuana was legalized, then hemp would be legalized, and the USA would again have a valuable cash crop to grow on marginal lands. It is stupid that hemp is an illegal crop... the only reason for it being illegal is that it seemed easier to pass a law against hemp than to train law enforcement personnel in the simple botany needed to make the distinction. I, for one, think that our cops are smart enough to learn how to do a simple field test.

      Of course, legalizing any of the highly profitable black market drugs would mean bucking the lobbying efforts of one of the USA's major industries, and one of the very few that enjoys freedom from paying any taxes on its profits. So I don't expect this to happen soon or without great effort.

      --
      Will
    6. Re:Legalize it? by jank1887 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Just for kicks:
      http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=author%3AD-P-Tashkin

      And cherry picking one result just to fan some flames:

      Pulmonary hazards of smoking marijuana as compared with tobacco
      TC Wu, DP Tashkin, B Djahed, and JE Rose - N Engl J Med. 1988 Feb 11;318(6):347-51

      "We conclude that smoking marijuana, regardless of tetrahydrocannabinol content, results in a substantially greater respiratory burden of carbon monoxide and tar than smoking a similar quantity of tobacco"

      Yes, there's more to it than that. And yes there are 612 items listed under that google search. And no, I didn't read through them for a counterpoint. Feel free. But I have no problem believing him to be a gov't funded expert. (note that doesn't make him a government expert.)

    7. Re:Legalize it? by SleepingWaterBear · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Legalize it, then it can be taxed and regulated. We should strongly consider doing the same thing with other drugs, too. If drugs were legally available, there would be no profit in the illicit drug trade, we would see a reduction in crime at all levels, and the medical costs associated with overdoses and adulterated drugs would also decrease. Legalizing marajuana would be an excellent test case.

      Also, if marajuana was legalized, then hemp would be legalized, and the USA would again have a valuable cash crop to grow on marginal lands. It is stupid that hemp is an illegal crop... the only reason for it being illegal is that it seemed easier to pass a law against hemp than to train law enforcement personnel in the simple botany needed to make the distinction. I, for one, think that our cops are smart enough to learn how to do a simple field test.

      Of course, legalizing any of the highly profitable black market drugs would mean bucking the lobbying efforts of one of the USA's major industries, and one of the very few that enjoys freedom from paying any taxes on its profits. So I don't expect this to happen soon or without great effort.

      I agree with you entirely that marijuana (and many other drugs) should be legalized. The vast majority of the problems associated with drugs are direct results of their being illegal, and enforcement accomplishes nothing but raising the price.

      I'd like to ask the slashdot community if they've ever heard of anyone who wanted it having trouble getting pot (or almost any common street drug for that matter). If we're not making access to the drugs difficult, what exactly are we doing? It's pretty damned obvious what the negative effects of making drugs illegal are - at the most basic level, the drug trade funnels millions of dollars to organized crime. Then there's the fact that it's much harder to help people with drug problems if they're afraid of being treated as criminals. Finally, without regulation and control, otherwise safe drugs (at least as safe if not safer than alcohol) can be adulterated and made toxic. The laws don't seem to be doing anything other stuffing our overcrowded prison systems. Personally I dislike pot - I think it makes people stupid and boring, and I don't like my mind to feel dull - but it's pretty damned obvious to anyone with half a brain that right now we're doing nothing but harm.

    8. Re:Legalize it? by tirefire · · Score: 5, Funny

      You're right. I'd never go to a place that was weed-tolerant. Places like Amsterdam, BC, and Portugal are like warzones.

    9. Re:Legalize it? by wisty · · Score: 4, Funny

      Try not to make it so logical.

      Illegal drugs are made by TERRORISTS and ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS. They are often sold, on the street, by STREET GANGS. By REGULATING the trade of these substances, we TAKE JOBS AWAY from HARD WORKING AMERICANS, and LET THE BAD GUYS WIN.

      The cost of preventing illegal drug imports, and the lost revenue from the taxes that could be applied to these if they were legal leads to HIGHER TAXES, and LESS MONEY FOR SCHOOLS.

    10. Re:Legalize it? by Verdatum · · Score: 3, Funny

      And if you had bothered to read his signature, you would have found out that no matter how obvious his sarcasm is, his comment will be taken seriously by someone.

    11. Re:Legalize it? by FreekyGeek · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When you say that it's "obvious to ANYONE ELSE WHO KNOWS THEM [pot smokers]: pot has long-term personality effects.", you're quite simply wrong.

      In SOME people (addicts), long-term heavy use can change personality somewhat. Everyone knows a few complete stoners who are high so much of the time that their capacity to deal with things is reduced. But the mistake you're making is assuming that EVERYONE WHO SMOKES POT IS AN ADDICT. And that's a big mistake.

      We all know how alcohol can change people's lives - but MOST people who drink alcohol are not alcoholics. In the exact same way, just because SOME people get addicted to pot, smoke too much, and get side effects does not mean that everyone who smokes occasionally will have the same effects.

      It's a perception-bias issue: you think that pot changes personalities because you only NOTICE the people who are addicts. For the vast majority of people who smoke pot, you can't tell that they do, because they don't abuse it. Believe me, If everyone you know who smoked wore a big neon sign that said "I smoke pot sometimes", you'd realize that for most people, which smoke occasionally and responsibly, those kinds of "personality effects" don't happen. It's easy to tell when someone is drunk, or if they clearly have a drinking problem, but for people who only drink moderately or occasionally, you can't tell them from anyone else because they're not abusing it.

      You're taking extreme cases and generalizing them to a huge group of people. That's a serious mistake. It's like saying that everyone who plays poker is a gambling addict.

    12. Re:Legalize it? by Lillebo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But the point still stands that weed makes folks do irrational things that can't be explained without assuming addiction.

      [citation needed] Please refrain from spitting personal opinions you can't back up with scientific data onto this site. There is no evidence that weed alters a person's basic personality structure (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cannabis_(drug)#Effects) - and if you define "irrational" as being willing to break the law, you need to reconsider your usage of the word.

  3. Behold, the power of Net by Tom90deg · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Ahh, once again, the power of the internet proves that the majority of people are pretty stupid. Of course, we already knew that because of Myspace. Yay glitter!

    1. Re:Behold, the power of Net by twostix · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Let me guess...the "majority of people" doesn't include you does it?

      Funny that.

    2. Re:Behold, the power of Net by Hurricane78 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Well, some people *are* better than others.

      Let me guess. You are not one of those that scores high in anything?

      Funny that.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    3. Re:Behold, the power of Net by bennomatic · · Score: 3, Funny

      Does golf count? I always get the high score.

      --
      The CB App. What's your 20?
  4. How about a real open governance system by Toe,+The · · Score: 4, Interesting

    The article gets it right in saying it is a "suggestion box." All we can do is suggest to our rulers what we want them to do: they still get to decide. This is still not democracy. It's barely even a democratic republic.

    If you want real democracy, please consider joining the Metagovernment project which is a collective of projects working to make governance a truly open system for everyone.

    Also, consider attending Participation Camp. The virtual meeting started this morning, and there will be a brainstorm session tomorrow morning (1500GMT, ie 11:00 AM Eastern).

    1. Re:How about a real open governance system by Darkness404 · · Score: 3, Informative

      The only way to have a truly free government is to have a government that protects only against force and fraud. That way you have freedom to do whatever you want to while being safe because of the government.

      --
      Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    2. Re:How about a real open governance system by Mr2001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The only way to have a truly free government is to have a government that protects only against force and fraud.

      If so, then people who ask for a "truly free government" should be careful what they wish for.

      That way you have freedom to do whatever you want to while being safe because of the government.

      Well, no, not quite. A ban on force and fraud is, itself, a restriction on your freedom: you aren't free to do whatever you want if what you want involves force or fraud. It's a perfectly justified restriction, but it's still a restriction.

      More importantly, a government that only protects against force and fraud is a government that doesn't regulate industry. We've seen where that leads, from healing tonics to meat packing to investment banking. There's plenty of deception and destruction that doesn't quite fall under the umbrella of "force and fraud".

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    3. Re:How about a real open governance system by PottedMeat · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I don't want a democracy. I don't want a democratic republic. I want a REPUBLIC.

      Too few people know the difference.

    4. Re:How about a real open governance system by Mr2001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Ok, if the healing tonics say that they work and they don't you can sue them for fraud. If the meat packing industries claim they are safe to eat (or insinuate it due to advertising or product placement) and they aren't you can sue them for fraud. If the investments aren't as secure as their ratings say they are, you can sue them for fraud. Eventually, businesses will regulate themselves [...]

      That's easy to say, but in practice it hasn't worked that way. It took the establishment of the FDA and SEC to actually make food and investments safer, and even now it still isn't perfect (witness the recent banking fiasco).

      Think about how much more third-party regulators would do for things that might actually cause illness.

      It's nice to imagine things like that, but again, if it's as simple as you make it sound, why haven't third party regulators actually sprung up and done anything? No one stopped third party food and drug regulators from coming into existence before the FDA, so where were they? Where were the independent securities rating agencies during the recent banking fiasco? They were in the pockets of the very institutions they were supposed to be rating.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    5. Re:How about a real open governance system by Mr2001 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The reason why third party regulators didn't step in before the FDA is because people back before The Jungle was published were blissfully ignorant. [...]

      For the investment firms, most Americans didn't really care how they were investing. Rather than doing research they decided to hire someone to put their money in a bunch of stocks that they didn't pick out. Thats what carelessness gets you.

      So, we should just resign ourselves to endless cycles of "get screwed, pay a little more attention, wait for third-party rating firms to spring up, put your trust in a third party rating firm that seems OK (not that you can tell, because you're not an expert on the subject, which is why you need them in the first place), pray they don't become corrupt, eventually become complacent, get screwed again"?

      I, for one, would rather have an organization with a government mandate that's transparent and accountable to the people, not a smorgasbord of private organizations where I'll have no idea which ones to trust and where none of them are really accountable to anyone.

      Managed funds serve a vital purpose: it's unreasonable to expect everyone to hand-pick every component of their portfolio, and most of them would do a terrible job anyway, because they aren't professional investors. Likewise, it's unreasonable to expect everyone to be an expert on medicine, auto repair, or any other service they're considering. If you lack the knowledge to be a doctor, you probably also lack the knowledge to recognize whether a doctor knows what he's doing, as well as the knowledge to recognize whether the third party telling you that a doctor knows what he's doing actually knows what they're doing.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
    6. Re:How about a real open governance system by Mr2001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      In a world where BILLIONS of consumers can rate and review the efficacy and truthfulness of products on the web, government regulation of healing tonics is worthless.

      Tell that to the people who lost their sense of smell by using Zicam.

      Meat packing? Do you really think government regulations has made food safer, or market forces?

      Government regulation.

      Market forces can't go into a food processing plant and see what's going into the vats. Health inspectors can. Market forces can cut off your future profits, but they can't put you in jail or take away the fortunes you've already earned by turning your employees into sausage.

      Investment banking is a world regulated by government's manipulation of their near-worthless fiat currency. I don't blame the banks, I blame the people in charge of creating the fluff-money most people think has value over their lifetimes.

      As opposed to, say, gold, which is a fluff-metal most people think has value over their lifetimes. The only difference is the gold supply is controlled unpredictably by mining companies, natural deposits, and industrial use, rather than regulators who control the supply intentionally to achieve policy goals.

      --
      Visual IRC: Fast. Powerful. Free.
  5. Re:Really?? by ArsonSmith · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "...But until then I don't see why it merits the time of our government."

    I think that's part of the point. All this other crap going on and we're still arresting people for smoking pot!?!

    --
    Paying taxes to buy civilization is like paying a hooker to buy love.
  6. Re:A real example of average american mentality. by Starlon · · Score: 5, Informative

    That's a lie. The only connection marijuana has with psychosis is that it irritates schizophrenic symptons, but so does alcohol. The psychiatric community is deathly afraid of marijuana, and make all sorts of claims as to its dangers, without a hint of hard, real research. If a patient smokes marijuana, they claim every single problem the patient is facing stems from the fact he or she smokes marijuana. From psychosis to depression -- it's all caused by marijuana. They claim marijuana's a depressant. The government claims it's a hallucinogen. Science claims it's medicine -- anti-nausea, pro-appetite, anti-depressant qualities. Don't believe me? Believe some real research. "The endocannabinoid system has been involved in the control of several neurophysiological and behavioural responses. Indeed, recent studies have suggested that the cannabinoid system could represent an important substrate for the control of emotional behaviour, and further research would probably help to identify new promising therapeutic targets. This paper reviews the results obtained in different animal models used to investigate emotional states after the manipulation of the endocannabinoid system. Cannabinoid compounds can induce anxiogenic- and anxiolytic-like responses in rodents depending on the experimental conditions. Studies using knockout mice lacking the CB1 cannabinoid receptors have shown the participation of this receptor in several behavioural responses including anxiety- and depressive-like states. Furthermore, the endocannabinoid system regulates the hypothalamic-pituitary adrenal axis, which is involved in providing an appropriate response to stressful situations. Recent studies have also demonstrated that the endocannabinoids can function as retrograde messengers, modulating the release of different neurotransmitter, including opioids, GABA and cholecystokinin that have been classically involved in the control of anxiety-like responses. All this recent information has further clarified the role played by the endogenous cannabinoid system in the control of emotional behaviour and provides data to support a new possible therapeutic use of cannabinoid compounds." Valverde, O. "Participation of the cannabinoid system in the regulation of emotional-like behaviour." 26 Nov. 2005. National Center for Biotechnology Information. 5 Jan. 2009. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed...kpos=4&log$=relatedreviews&logdbfrom=pubmed

    --
    Health Freedom is almost as popular as Freedom itself.
  7. Re:Really?? by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And for some reason marijuana is an important issue? Are you kidding me? I don't see how it could possibly be more relevant than any of the issues I already listed. If we could solve all of them, then I would be comfortable with our national government looking into this "marijuana issue" (whatever the hell the issue is). But until then I don't see why it merits the time of our government.

    Lets see... You legalize marijuana and you can cut down on the number of arrests made, cut down on the number of cops, when you legalize it you would also allow for new industries to thrive, tax dollars to collect, Assuming even only a moderate increase of marijuana consumption as a part of it being legalized, you open up an entire new industry, more jobs, less spending for the government, more freedom and more revenue.

    There is no way you can argue for marijuana to not be legalized by a purely financial standpoint. Plus, legalizing it will cut costs, and spend less time looking at the issue rather than the more time you are foolishly suggesting.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  8. Welcome to the internet, Mr. President. by girlintraining · · Score: 3, Funny

    I think I see a flaw in your cunning plan, Mr. President: The people who voted for you are also online. And dear god, are they stupid. Don't feel bad though; The ones that voted for the other guy aren't any smarter. -_- But then, what did you really expect? Given a choice between democracy and educated civil discourse, or a large smack of porn and screaming matches, 9 out of 10 internet users prefer the latter. And the 10th one was a cat walking over the keyboard.

    --
    #fuckbeta #iamslashdot #dicemustdie
  9. With all those problems by Chuck+Chunder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It's not surprising people want to get get high.

    --
    Boffoonery - downloadable Comedy Benefit for Bletchley Park
  10. Re:Really?? by PottedMeat · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Arresting pot smokers is an incredibly lucrative business! That's why it's still banned.

  11. Re:Really?? by Darkness404 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And, I'm sure if you spent enough time creating moral panic over alcohol, tobacco and easy to find over-the-counter drugs, you would find that the results are the same if not worse.

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
  12. Re:A real example of average american mentality. by bennomatic · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does it cause the user to submit long rambling posts which include no white space?

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
  13. Re:Lol Democracy by interkin3tic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm fairly certain they're still ignoring the issue that the most people who participated in this poll and who are in all likelyhood are not representative of the voting publicwere interested in changing, legalization of marijuana.

    Fixed that for you.

    An online poll conducted like this is going to be ridiculously skewed. Even if no one cheated, voting hundreds of times for their own "legalize pot" suggestions, the demographic here is going to be much MUCH younger than the average voting population. No age restrictions. And half the people who posted on there probably sent a link to all their friends and posted it on like-minded forums. Those people who are really REALLY opposed to legalization are also less likely to participate in this. Likewise, a lot of those people most in favor of legalization don't vote or can't vote yet.

    I think it's more likely this was actually a way of getting younger voters interested in government.

  14. Re:Really?? by bennomatic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Of course, so would be taxing pot smokers.

    --
    The CB App. What's your 20?
  15. Re:Really?? by Stormwatch · · Score: 5, Informative

    when you legalize it you would also allow for new industries to thrive

    You're really stretching the plural on that one. I was unaware that making bongs was considered a potential new growth industry.

    Paper. Clothes. Construction materials. Food. Medicines. Fuel. There's a lot that you can do with hemp. End your ignorance.

  16. Re:Really?? by BlueBoxSW.com · · Score: 5, Informative

    I would just like to point out that Narconon runs the web site you pulled this info from. According to Wikipedia:

    Narconon is an in-patient rehabilitation program for drug abusers in several dozen treatment centers worldwide, chiefly in the United States and western Europe. Each Narconon center is independently owned and operated under a license from ABLE International, a Scientology-related entity.

  17. Re:Lol Democracy by BKX · · Score: 5, Informative

    People always think that the only reason to legalize cannibus is pot. It's not. It's not even the best reason. It barely makes the top ten, and even then, only because it's the most effective anti-nauseant (anti-emetic for pedants) known to modern science. Hemp fiber could replace wood pulp for use in paper tomorrow for a tenth our current cost. It could replace synthetic fibers in textiles and increase the strength, durability, comfort, threadfastness and affordability of the clothing and cloth products that it goes into. As a byproduct of the hemp fiber industry, hemp oil could replace synthetic lubricants at a fraction of the current cost in industrial applications.

    Proper crop rotation with hemp and other cash crops can virtually eliminate the need for artificial fertilizers. The list just keeps going on and on. And all you prohibitionists can think about is getting stoned.

  18. Re:Lol Democracy by tsm_sf · · Score: 5, Insightful

    And all you prohibitionists can think about is getting stoned.

    No, they're thinking about their jobs. Fewer people to arrest, fewer people to jail, fewer people to track once out on parole. Hell, the prison guard's union in california consistently lobbies for harsher sentencing for drug offenders. That's repugnant.

    I think it needs to be made clear that the two main supporters of prohibition are bad cops and drug dealers. That really tells you all you need to know.

    --
    Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
  19. Why are people so difficult? by Korey+Kaczor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The irony of this is, twofold: One, this is the administration that that had added a huge increase to tobacco taxes, and these people think that the government is actually going to legalize marijuana? Hah hah hah! Good one.

    Two, it's just sad that our country's main concern is legalizing some drug that's major benefit is to get people high. While marijuana has a lot of medical uses, and banning it is pointless, it's just pathetic that nobody cares about inflation, an overzealous foreign policy, the sick demented system of child "protection" services ruined to scam parents and ruin the family, the court system being a guilty-until-proven-innocent fiasco where the court orders you to prove your innocence and you have to pay for court costs, drugs tests, psych exams, and etc. to prove your innocence, and freedom from censorship. Nope, us Americans gotta have our weed! Gotta get high so we won't have any other problems to worry about, just pretend they don't exist with a nice pipe in front of us.

    I guess there is also a third point of irony: Weed stupifies you, you'd think the government would favor deregulating it so they could tax it to the sky's limit and get more money off of you that way, while having a bunch of people too high to care about the other rights the government keeps taking away.

  20. republics devolve and decay by circletimessquare · · Score: 4, Insightful

    and give rise to revolution or a strong man who throws out all the rights in the republic to reestablish order, leading to autocracy

    if you aren't explicit about the whole democracy thing, you wind up with an aristocratic elite with a firm grip on the government. study the history of all republics, this is a natural evolution. for all of its flaws, democracy has a feature which trumps everything else: it manufactures legitimacy. the will of the people is consulted, and the government is chosen from that will. the people are happy they have their say. there is always malcontent, in any system, but it is held at a minimum in democracy

    without the explicit consultation democracy provides, the will of the people and the agenda of the ruling class begin to drift apart over time. simple miscommunication and entropy can be the culprit, no real malice, although there's always enough of that around. mistrust and illegtimacy is the result, and social stability decays, eventually leading to outright revolt or an incredibly weak government that gives way to a strong man and autocracy who reestablishes order, but at the cost of all the precious rights you look to a republic to guarantee

    so you're stuck with democracy. it provides stability. a republic without democracy isn't stable, it decays

    and i really have to wonder what makes you so distrustful of your fellow man. some sort of blind conceit on your part probably, a personal failure of yours

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  21. Re:Lol Democracy by Jurily · · Score: 3, Informative

    I'm fairly certain they're still ignoring the issue that the most people were interested in changing, legalization of marijuana.

    California already voted on that. Then Washington told them they don't get to choose anymore.

  22. Re:Really?? by shentino · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Which is exactly why it WON'T happen.

    There are big industries making obscene profits due to hemp being outlawed. You think for one second they'll let it be legalized without a huge fight?

    Any politician who so much as suggested it would be committing political suicide.

  23. take all of your concerns with marijuana by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Insightful

    add a few more, real and imagined

    and marijuana is still less harmful than alcohol and nicotine. do you really want to stack the health effects of marijuana you list against the health effects of nicotine or alcohol?

    and so its not logically coherent to have nicotine and alcohol legal, and thc illegal. ban all three, or legalize all three. that's the only logically coherent position. a sound pharmacological understanding of the relative effects of the three drugs leads to the inevitable conclusion that making one of the three illegal is arbitrary, and really nothing more than a racist historical artifact from when marijuana was a scary loco weed that mexicans used. the frontier judge's daddy meanwhile was a proper german or irish drunk: familiarity. therefore, legality. no other good reason exists for marijuana's illegality than historical xenophobia. certainly not pharmacological science

    i can see meth permanently banned and the DEA waging war on that drug forever. same with cocaine, same with heroin. the addictiveness of these drugs is off the charts, combined with long term incapacitation (unlike nicotine, which is extremely addictive, but doesn't incapacitate). you can't work. you can't have a relationship. you can take meth, cocaine, and heroin and turn someone who would otherwise have a productive life into a zombie that forsakes the difficulties of your average relationship and your average job in order to feed a need

    but marijuana? its lightweight

    please. this isn't about legalization of all drugs, just marijuana. and please don't suggest legalizing marijuana means we have legalize far, far worse substances. that's like saying allowing gay marriage means we will have to legalize bestiality and necrophilia. fear mongering bullshit

    just legalize marijuana already. keep the hardcore substances banned. its simple pharmacological common sense

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  24. Re:Lol Democracy by johnlcallaway · · Score: 4, Interesting

    What BKX didn't mention is there are forms of hemp that do not have the same stoner effects that could be legalized, but aren't because law enforcement can't easily tell the difference. Or at least that's the reason often cited.

    Imagine giving tobacco farmers a replacement crop that would provide them a great income and not have the same social stigma tobacco has. It might be possible that with such a change, growing tobacco for cigarettes would be reduced, naturally driving up the cost of cigarettes and further reducing usage WITHOUT government intervention, while increasing tax revenues from the sales of all the hemp products.

    Nah .. .that would never happen. Who would vote in something that gave our government less control.....

    For the record, I am for the legalization of marijuana, the stoner kind. I smoked 30 years ago and so did many people who have since stopped. It's obviously not addictive, except for those that can get addicted to anything.

    I also have glaucoma, and spend $100/month (even after insurance) for tiny bottles of eye drops to reduce the pressure. The drops sting when I put them in three times a day. I'd much rather sit out on my back patio a couple times a day and enjoy a little toke.....

    --
    I rarely read replies, it's my opinion and if you thought about your opinion a little more, I'm OK with that.
  25. Re:Lol Democracy by Allicorn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A well armed society is a polite society.

    I'm guessing this is why the English have been, for centuries, known around the world for their ignorant, rude, brashness whilst the Americans are recognized far and wide for their dainty manners and eccentric etiquette?

    --
    OMG!!! Ponies!!!
  26. Re:Lol Democracy by nschubach · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... and a point is made. The United States is NOT a Democracy. We are a Republic. Under a Democracy, the majority forces their opinions on the minority and it eventually turns into an Oligarchy. This is done over years and years of manipulation to grant power to a more specific group each term. We've been boiling down to an ever strong President with lap dog Congressmen and the Federal Reserve who control our country instead of the people it was intended for. You, me, and your neighbor.

    In our Republic, laws are set forth through a strict set of procedures to ensure fairness to all parties involved, not just the most popular. This is why we were formed as a Republic and NOT a Democracy. This is why the Constitution does not state that we are a Christian country (even though some people would like that, namely the church because that gives them power over law.)

    Recently though, people tend to forget this. They think that if they get enough people behind an idea, they can make other people follow it their way. Instead of petitioning their Congressmen and voting in their preferred representative (in local and federal elections), they think that they can change America by selecting one person to change it all. It's an affront to the Constitution and what it means to stand by Democracy and what it means.

    --
    Every time I start to have faith in humanity, I ruin it by driving to work between 7 and 8 am.
  27. Re:Really?? by twostix · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why yes, yes I do, much more than you do it would seem.

    $14 trillion is your DEBT you illiterate. Debt is money owed which is a fraction of your total obligations.

    The government does more than just borrow money it creates programs to spend that money on and each American (currently) also has half a million dollars worth of *obligations* to pay for. The government can't put 100% of the money it receives into paying back debt without taking money away from it's programs and services. Which is why I clearly stated that it would take over a century to pay that 14 trillion down even with 100% of Americans wages going in as the government also has to pay for it's obligations (Social Security, Medicare, Military, Beauracracy) which are increasing rapidly over time, even if they didn't allow new spending starting now.

    Your current tax level isn't even coming *close* to paying for the governments obligations *let alone* making repayments on the debt and interest owed on bonds. Which is why your government has borrowed nearly 10 trillion dollars from the citizens of China, Russia, Japan, Saudi Arabia and others in the last decade to keep the good times going.

    So you're either going to raise taxes to an astronomical level, slash and burn your government services and keep taxes at the same level or do the tried and true practice of bankrupt governments and devalue your currency or worse simply default.

    http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2009-05-28-debt_N.htm

    Comprehension is good.

  28. Re:Really?? by mbone · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And for some reason marijuana is an important issue?

    Almost one million arrests per year ? 50 to 100,000 people or so in jail at any one time for possession ? A few dozen people killed each year while being arrested or while in jail ?
    Corruption all over the place ? Damn straight it's an important issue. And, unlike many issues, it is a purely government issue, that the government could solve in a week, if the government was interested in actually listening to what the people were saying.

  29. Re:A real example of average american mentality. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    So he was right, plain old text or pot for short.

  30. Re:Health Care/Social Plan To Fix Everything... by Howzer · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course you're describing exactly the system that the US has already. How clever of you.

    Except you've omitted one tiny fact: the US system costs the US government (and thus US taxpayers) approximately 4 TIMES MORE per citizen than socialized systems, and the quality of care is demonstrably lower.

    You don't do socialized medicine because it's kinder to poor people (although it is)
    You don't do socialized medicine because it creates a healthier and more productive population (although it does)
    You don't do socialized medicine because it removes the profit motive (i.e. denial of care) from the healthcare equation (although it helps to do this)

    You do socialized medicine because it's cheaper.

    Anyone who tells you that socialized medicine is more expensive, and/or will lead to a poorer standard of care, either works for a US insurance company, or is willfully ignoring all the evidence from every other industrialized 1st world country, or, like you I suspect, is just a fsckwit.

  31. Re:My suggestions by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 3, Insightful

    1. Like hell it's not.

    Has Congress declared War? If not, then Habeas Corpus is in full effect.

    2. Where does the Bill of Rights say "This only applies to citizens"?

    Where?

    3. Yes. End all "X race is more equal than Y race" rules. End all types of discrimination.

    4. The ideal marriage law is none at all. Marriage is an institution of the church you belong to. Government should have no bearing in that, nor any tax breaks. Let those who can consent do as they wish.

    --
  32. Re:Lol Democracy by mcvos · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... and a point is made. The United States is NOT a Democracy. We are a Republic.

    You say that as if they're mutually explusive. They're not. Dictatorship and democracy are mutually explusive. Monarchy and republic are mutually exclusive. But all democracies are either a republic or a monarchy, and the US is not a monarchy. It's a democratic federal republic (although you could argue about how democratic it really is, considering how the system is organised to effectively only allow two parties to be represented in Congress, and a president can be elected on a minority vote).

    Under a Democracy, the majority forces their opinions on the minority and it eventually turns into an Oligarchy.

    Not necessarily, although it is what's hapened in the US. But that's more because of the lack of real democracy in the system.

    In our Republic, laws are set forth through a strict set of procedures to ensure fairness to all parties involved, not just the most popular.

    In which republic exactly? Definitely not in the US, where only the two biggest parties have any real chance of representation.

  33. Registering by JimboFBX · · Score: 3, Insightful

    So registering on the site isn't https. I know this isn't credit card information but still, I wonder how many people use the same password for this as they do their email. Too easy to snoop such a high profile web server.

  34. Re:Lol Democracy by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Fuck all of you. You still believe that schoolboy bullshit about how the country is governed? Dream on, sleepers!

    Let me spell it out for you: The United States is a "Goldman Sachsocracy" The man with the gold will sack us all over the world.

    Freedom? You have more people incarcerated in your borders than any nation in history. Why? It's good for business.

    I wish Americans had half the guts of 15-year-old Iranian girls! There'd have been 5 American Revolutions since 1870. Your textbook lies about the accountability of US government to the people have kept you complacent, and made you both arrogant yet ignorant and oppressed.

    They just stole over a hundred billion dollars from your earnings and your next two generations, and GAVE it to a firm that prints your money, runs your fiscal policy and just paid out the BIGGEST bonuses in its 140 year history.

    You live in the Matrix - and that's not a metaphor. Like George Carlin said; "They call it the American Dream, because you have to be asleep to believe it.

    Wake up.

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  35. Re:Lol Democracy by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Jesus. What do they teach you these days?

    Plato.

    "The Republic" is the Roman derived title of his main surviving work.

    It is a series of hypothetical dialogs, as if conducted by his master, Socrates, with his school and visitors to court, on the ideal rule for the City-State. It does NOT outline or advocate a republican form of governance. It's ideal is a Philosopher King - and models this through contrasting forms and their evolutions.

    In modern terms, Plato is a prototype for Fascism - with the good of a state being the highest form of Government - above any kind of personal interest or property - provided the state is "just". The nature of this "justness" also provides much of the food for the book's discussions.

    In it, he also issues the allegory of the cave. Interestingly, this is the model for The Matrix - which is where most of you are living your lives!

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  36. Re:Lol Democracy by glarbl_blarbl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    That's an absurd overstatement. Or naive. No public policy of any type can ever truly be a "good idea in virtually every imaginable way."

    Actually it's quite possible, you see, because Prohibition is such a bad idea in every imaginable way.

    --
    I use friend/foe to signal strong [dis]agreement instead of mod points. What else are f/f good for?
  37. Re:Lol Democracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Remember it's the burden of proof of those that want legalization not those that view it as being harmful.

    Wrong. The burden of proof falls on the accuser, not the accused. That's quite some backwards logic you have there.

    The illegalization of marijuana was never based on proof. It was outlawed to protect business. The main supporters of it's illegalization used the public's fear of minorities and anti-marijuana propaganda to accomplish that.

    If you'd like you can read up on Harry J. Anslinger for some examples of what kind of "proof" was originally used by the Commissioner of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics to describe the problem and afford more power to his position. I've posted some of those examples below.

    There are 100,000 total marijuana smokers in the US, and most are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos, and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz, and swing, result from marijuana use. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes, entertainers, and any others.

    The primary reason to outlaw marijuana is its effect on the degenerate races.

    Reefer makes darkies think they're as good as white men.

    You smoke a joint and you're likely to kill your brother.

  38. Re:Lol Democracy by Philip+K+Dickhead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Your guns just keep you dangerous to each other - while the Bankers rob your unborn grandchildren, and sell your labor into debt-bondage 'til your graves.

    Any Iranian is freer, weaponless and ruled by priests, than the average American with all of his guns.

    The events of the past week have demonstrated this clearly. Armed with placards and fearlessness, they walk into sniper fire. Florida in 2000 was a cowards paradise, by any comparative measure.

    --
    "Speaking the Truth in times of universal deceit is a revolutionary act." -- George Orwell
  39. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 4, Funny

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  40. Re:Lol Democracy by couchslug · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Having defended myself with a firearm, I disagree about their social utility. I am in physical danger from other citizens, not the government.

    Mere paper debt is an inconvenience, not a disaster.

    Iranians aren't fighting to be free (or they'd be killing Mullahs and destroying theocracy),they just want a piece of the economic pie.

    "Any Iranian is freer, weaponless and ruled by priests, than the average American with all of his guns."

    E-rage much? USians have far more personal freedom from religion than the Iranian, and far more economic mobility. No one ruled by priests is free until they reject the belief and kill the priest.

    --
    "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  41. Re:Lol Democracy by Daimanta · · Score: 4, Informative

    "I can't see how a monarchy can be democratic. The monarch has ultimate power and so the people do not."

    Honestly, did you even do basic research on various types of monarchies in the world?
    No?
    Didn't think so.

    There are vast differences between types of monarchies just as there are vast different differences between republics.
    For example, here's a list of 3 republics:
    -the US
    - North Korea
    - Iran

    They are ALL republics(look it up if you don't believe me) yet they ALL have vastly different types of goverment. If you would compare them, they would be put in three totally different categories yet they are ALL republics.

    In the same way there are different types of monarchies with three examples:

    - Saudi-Arabia
    - The Netherlands
    - Sweden

    These types of monarchies are again vastly different. 1 is an absolute monarchy, 2 are democracies. 2 out of 3 have the monarch as head of goverment yet all 3 have the monarch as head of state. If you do some further research about the topic you will notice that pretty much all sates are different in the way they function and that the words "republic" and "monarchy" can have vastly different meanings in different parts of the world.

    But don't let me stop your bashing, please.

    --
    Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
  42. Re:Lol Democracy by MightyYar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Let me spell it out for you: The United States is a "Goldman Sachsocracy"

    So is the whole world. The communists made a slightly different game of it, but there will always be an elite class.

    Freedom? You have more people incarcerated in your borders than any nation in history. Why? It's good for business.

    Not quite. People in this country support tough-on-crime politicians and the war on drugs. Combine that with racism and ghettos and you have a recipe for a large prison population. The private prison industry is a symptom, not a cause - though I concede that they are now powerful enough to help sustain the cycle.

    They just stole over a hundred billion dollars from your earnings and your next two generations, and GAVE it to a firm that prints your money, runs your fiscal policy and just paid out the BIGGEST bonuses [guardian.co.uk] in its 140 year history.

    You're off by an order of magnitude. Goldman got $10 billion in TARP funds and by almost all accounts can't wait to pay it back as soon as the US government lets them. Goldman is being rewarded by the market for making the right moves a year and a half ago in the mortgage market. They are one of the last men standing and in the absence of much competition have been exceedingly profitable. The bonuses are record-breaking because the profits are record-breaking. This is not an AIG example where bonuses are being paid out by a failed firm.

    Wake up.

    Not gonna happen. Your best bet is to work within the existing system, which can be quite lucrative.

    --
    W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
  43. Re:Lol Democracy by R2.0 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Honest question from a skeptic: if hemp is a miracle plant with all these uses, why isn't it being grown all over the world on an industrial scale? We should be seeing cheap hemp paper imports wiping out Weyerhauser and GP, hemp fabric imports wiping out the US cotton industry, and hemp sourced fuel putting ExxonMibil out of business.

    Why have these things not happened yet?

    --
    "As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson