Herb-Derived Medicines: Marijuana and Opium.

My reaction to anything people say is to read history. For medical pot, I look to China in the early to mid-19th century. When the British came a-knockin' with Indian Opium in 1792, the Chinese Emporer was all "aiite, sounds good...it's a medicine and all." By 1826, the fabric of urban Chinese society was entirely destroyed. In 1838, the Emperor appointed Lin Zexu to go to Canton and demolish the opium trade. In 1839, the British sent troops to enforce the opium trade's existence - they went to war with China over opium (known as the "Opium War" lol). The medicinal effects were entirely overlooked and a lot of suffering happened because of it.

Psychoactive drugs destroy societies

What happened to "medical opium?" By the 1860's, scientists had taken plant-based opium (poppies) and made a mass-producable drug: morphine. From morphine we have oxycodone, common codeine (which is in Tylenol/Excedrine today), and thousands of other drugs: all much safer with fewer side effects, less addictive capacity, and more targeted results than.........smoking a plant.

Marijuana is not a wonderdrug. It's a plant. The medicinal properties of it can be isolated and made into a painkiller: we dont need to be getting cancer patients stoned to get rid of their headaches. Just as opium has bred a bunch of commonly used, excellent drugs, cannibis can breed "canniboids." Dronabinol already exists (known as 'Marinol') and is, like morphine, a very crude drug. Instead of investing so many millions in the regulation of medical pot, why not have drug companies make drugs out of it? It's, you know, what they do.

After all, we live in the modern world: we dont rip up grass and light it on fire to get rid of minor aches and pains.

Share

Why I am a Republican and The Challenge for Conservative Leadership

I've been asked a handful of times why I consider myself a Republican even after the Bush administration's denial of fiscal conservatism and the party not representing the base for an extended period of time. It's quite simple, really, and I'll answer it in the format of the Michigan GOP's 2008 tear-off calendar...

I am a Republican because...in the 90's, my single mother worked 3 jobs, sometimes 4, and had the opportunity to work as much as she wanted and, thus, provide the lifestyle she wanted for herself and her children. This was made possible by Ronald Reagan (fundamentally changed America) and John Engler (unemployment was down to the lowest point ever under his leadership: 3%). These two leaders defied the establishment Left, reduced the burden of government, and freed all Americans to be as productive and wealthy as they wanted to. While Reagan's federal plans took longer to implement and longer to fade, Engler's were more direct and closer to home, making them quicker to effect change. In my life I have witnessed the success of these plans and their model of 'Opportunity + Freedom = Prosperity = Liberty;' I have also watched as the Left and their ideas infected both parties and have brought this nation, the one that accomplished so much in my childhood and prospered as no other nation in history, to its knees before the world.

The combined destruction wrought by the economic policies of Bill Clinton, Jennifer Granholm, George W. Bush, and Barack Obama is a terrible crime against the people of this nation and my state. Clinton's policies, held off to an extent by Newt Gingrich and his allies in Congress, inevitably have altered, and in the altering, tangled, the economic framework that brought our people so much liberty in the past.

Now, Michigan rots in its longest and gravest economic depression ever. Detroit, once the crown jewel of the republic, sits with 44.8% of its citizens unemployed. Of our state as a whole, more than one out of five people do not have a job. Two million, two hundred and ninety thousand of our neighbors, family members, friends, and former coworkers have been thrown into personal indignity by a government-run, government-decided, government-dominated system that does not work.

When we do find hours, we grab them and change our schedules and activities around them. It really is a fundamental change from the reality my mother raised my brother and I in through the 1990's. In the business she owns now, she's had to cut six jobs, six livelihoods, during this 'still-fragile recovery.' Our new reality makes us beholden to scarce work and, thus, less free to pursue our own interests. This government-altered reality seems to hunt down liberty and exterminate it wherever it can be found.

Instead of being enabled through opportunity and freedom provided by free markets, the elimination and over-regulation of those markets disables us and makes into pawns, bottom feeders, regardless of our level of income. While we run into trouble with our mortgages, property taxes, car payments, college bills, and utility charges, our elected 'leaders' continue to spend and spend and spend and spend, pursuing personal and political goals. They, then, seek to repeat the mistakes of the past and 'help' the economy by distracting us with a nice new paved road or train rides to Disney Land. Historical changes for the absolute worse just like this one repeatedly display the challenge for conservative leadership, a challenge met only somewhat by conservative leaders during the times of Engler and Reagan.

Conservatives have to find and nominate leaders who can build systems that are self-terminating when they've outlived their respect for liberty, but are sustainable in spite of the Left's attempts to bend them to their own devices. That's up to every one of us to ensure these systems get put in place for every one of our 513,000 elected offices. I, a lonesome blogger, dare you to prove your commitment to our principles and ensure that this kind of real change happens in your community. We can bring back that level of opportunity, freedom, prosperity, and liberty that both you and I have experienced in the past. It wont be easy, but think of the daily struggle of our troops who preserve this simple opportunity for us: we ought to do right by them and seize the day.

Share

A Time for Choosing

There's been a flurry of reports in the last few months over Afghanistan. As you may have read or heard, things are getting worse: July and August were the worst months in years of the war in terms of casualties. I wouldnt be complete if I didnt mention that some of the problem is Obama's fault. He put in place several directives to "protect civilians;" being that our enemies use these civilians as shields, these policies have resulted in some casualties on our side. With the politicking out of the way, I can get to the necessary facts.

Michael Mullen, US Joint Chiefs of Staff chairman - a big guy in the military, first called for more troops in Afghanistan (sending 21,000 during the Afghan elections) and "stalled" on liberal calls for allowing morale-damaging gays in the military. Doing his job (read: these two grievous offenses) provoked Sen. Susan Collins (D-somewhere) to request a review of the 'rules of engagement' from Mullen (meaning that she doesnt have confidence in his work). In the executive branch, the reaction has been much less exciting: Obama has stated that he will not make an 'immediate' decision on sending more troops and that he's going to be boring and "take a very deliberate process" of decision. In other words, Obama has reached a time for choosing and he doesnt know what to do - therefore he pulls over his legacy from the senate...and does nothing.

On the side seemingly pressuring him towards giving up on the war is the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Michigan's wonderful senior senator (who hits the deck if an engine backfires) Carl Levin, seems to think he and his life of Lansing, caviar and fine wine are better suited to make military judgment calls than those who eat MRE's and sleep in foxholes outside Kabul. He's supported by the liberal lifestyle groups, European socialist nations, and my more libertarian friends. Cumulatively, this support is a remnant of the arthritic "New Left" who would scrap the war effort on the advice of a few misguided, anti-pragmatic leftist faculty members who, themselves, are holed up in a fantasy world. This, however, is the world Obama comes from.

Thus his choice: he can choose to side with those who actually understand the issue, or he can play politics, satisfy his base, and secure renomination. Judging from the Guantanamo Bay Prison issue (where Obama decided to close it against common sense, the majority of the American people, and Dick Cheney), Obama will side with his Lefty base in order to gin-up sufficient inflammation to pass the energy tax, health care, and "card check." On the other hand, Dem Sen. Max Baucus' Gang of 6 (which includes John McCain...the ranking Senate Armed Services Committee Republican, who fervently disagrees with Levin's anti-war recommendation) has just released a misguided health insurance bill that will need some GOP support to have legitimacy post-passage. Upon the desk in the oval office sits one choice: it is a complex choice when viewed through a political lens yet a simple one if based in common sense.

If he decides pragmatically, Obama will apply Patraeus' model in Iraq (troop surge, essentially) with a little flexibility to compensate for Afghanistan's historical lack of a developed government. This choice will get harder and the conditions worse the longer he puts it off; regardless of what he decides, his decision will dramatically shape the future of the Obama presidency. I, for one, hope the president makes the prudent one.

Facebook politics

We all know that there is a tremendous impact on our culture from emerging social networks...yet older generations are largely absent from this sphere.

One application I use when discussing this impact is in the realm of workers' unions...my argument is, simply, that Facebook makes a continuous union entirely irrelevant. With real-time group updates, any employee can communicate en mass with all other employees; if there is a perceived abuse (lets say a contract violating staff meeting OMGrsh!!), the employee that feels strongly about it could contact all others and organize resistance against said staff meeting very quickly...and for *free.* This bypasses all need of and all use for union personnel which have classically been committed to doing said organizing for a living. Further, this decentralizes 'the union' to the point where it not only gets back to caring about the workers, it is composed entirely of small, voluntary efforts directly from professionally equal workers. The most recognizable flaw in that framework is human laziness and the will to $pay$ a bit to have someone else make your career decisions. Regardless, this is a small-scale example of the greater decentralization of American culture.

Our nation began as one focused as much as possible on decentralization of power and culture. As we "progressed," we happened upon a little guy named FDR and the trend was reversed until, as technology has progressed, we return to the upward course toward a generally decentralized culture (not government....in a democracy, political changes always follow cultural changes). We can use television as an illustration: in the 50's, you have 5 shows to watch at any given time; today you have (in my household) over 900. The difference isn't just the amount of channels, of course, its what is on: today's shows/songs/entertainment are much more tailored to specific demographics and lives where people will be most comfortable with them...this is at direct opposition to the beginning days of TV where, if you were to watch television, you had to accept culture you weren't used to...this socialized a more monolithic cultural unity.

Today, I don't have to watch MTV or other liberal stations. I can watch a Fraiser re-run every night, be entirely content and fully secure in my cultural identity. This disassociates me with Monica Conyers, Hank Williams Jr., Pierre from Montreal, Adolf from Germany, Abib from Saudi Arabia, etc. etc. With our type of selective data accessibility, we don't have to see outside our adopted norms nor do we have to even speak with people from our colleges.

My Blackberry Pearl allows me to just speak with Katelyn and a handful of pre-existing friends; if I choose, I don't ever have to 'make' friends again and it's not even necessary that I speak to my Laker peers. I can block all but an isolated group of peers from my Facebook StalkerFeed (a list of news on what your 'Friends' are doing). Effectively, we can cut ourselves off from any and all socialization beyond that which has already occurred...and we do.

As stated above, this is nothing new: geographically-based social isolation is in our American blood! The post-war rise of the 'sub-division,' small towns ('nuff said), pop-culture-famous neighborhoods in New York City, lifestyle based isolation (Saugatuck/Douglas), immigrant communites (Holland, Chinatown): these all have existed for hundreds of years and all are based around the cultural pluralism that existed at the Founding. Now, the current trend is nothing bad...you cant stop it, I cant stop it, and the government surely cant stop it.

The latter point destroys hope for a D.C. central government with anything above basic power: decentralization of culture MUST be followed by a return to the wells of democracy at the local and state levels. If you don't, you end up with the USSR's premiership in the Oval Office...someone (like Obama is now) who presses ideas based on the President's perceptions (which are vastly different than, say, mine) leading to totalitarian domination of segments of the population (i.e. what is typicalized as the the "white middle class" but is actually made up of all races, nationalities, religions, etc. It is the achievement class, a group centered around personal drive and capitalism, that is being targeted by this administration in favor of those Obama thinks inherently 'deserve' to be bettered.)

The threat is not that Obama is doing things "wrong" (we simply see them differently...the money is going away from us to those "deserving," but for Democrats, the money always comes from benevolent and kind government officials) but that he's being powerful, period. It's not right to force your norms and mores upon anybody, a decentralized system prevents this type of oppression. With Facebook generating 'artificial towns' and the economy being more and more online, we are shuffling to be with those we're comfortable with in settings of our liking. Socialism doesnt work because it overrides fundamental differences and dismantles productivity (See: France). The only sustainable answer is returning to localities/states, where government stays with people already on my Contact list, that think along the same lines as 'me,' and are right down the street/highway.

Journalists, Courage, and Union

I know I said I would do a tradition of Lincoln post if the news was slow...it hasnt been, but my noodle has been cooked by a recent event...

From what I've heard, two female journalists were working near the DMZ for Al Gore's company and have ended up in North Korean (commie) custody. Being that the communists of the last, oh, 185 years havent been known for their kindness and compassion, Kimmy Il sentenced them to 12 years of hard labor (a.k.a. cruel and unusual punishment) for "Grave crimes against the Korean nation."

This situation reminds me of something TR had to deal with back in 1904. For the record, TR is one of my favorite Presidents (I respect his modernization of government...more importantly, he first broached an early conservatism both at home and abroad) and I did remember much of the topic, yet I'm not that smart and did do some research.

"Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead!"

Ion Perdicaris was a Greek-American working as the American consul to Morocco...in 1904, the diplomat-aristocrat was abducted by a rebel band (Moors titled Berbers) lead by a notorious Robin-Hood-like brigand named Raisuli. Raisuli's demands were $70,000 and some territory out of the Morrocan sultan. This didnt fly under a courageous president.

Roosevelt immediately issued the big-stick line "Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead!" which was toned-down by John Hay, the Secretary of State, in a telegram "The government wants Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead." Following the telegram were several warships, dispatched by a direct order from the president, and, upon their arrival, the hostages were released.

Lets compare results to Obama....the 2009 White House released this statement: "We are all focused on the journalists very closely. And by we, I mean all levels of the US [Federal] government. These are young women with families - one with a 4-year old daughter - and we are making clear to North Korea through many channels that they should be released and reunited with their families."

. . .

THAT'S NOT GOOD ENOUGH!

Liberal journalists or not, these are American citizens and it is our spineless President's JOB to get them out of there! I'm afraid that Mr. Obama will never understand that you cannot simply talk to madmen...I fear more that these women, most likely raped and tortured already, will be forgotten by a political machine too alike North Korea in its willingness to sacrifice many for an ideology.

With wimps populating the highest offices, all we can do is pray for them.