Skip to main content

Many Kossacks have advocated patience with respect to Obama and reforming drug policy.  More and more Americans don't want to wait.  

Following 4/20 coverage from all corners of the media, the hits just keep on coming.

Zogby (yeah, I know):52% Say Marijuana Should Be Legal, Taxed, Regulated

Schwarzenegger wants debate, Rep. Frank is great commenting on 'debate' with Lou Dobbs over on Drug WarRant.  Thanks Pete, I had missed that one.

LEAP's Norm Stamper on alcohol vs. marijuana and the new Drug Czar, Gil Kerlikowske.

MPP on MSNBC and CNBC and The Marijuana Law Tipping Point below the fold.

MPP's Rob Kampia on MSNBC:

MPP's Rob Kampia on CNBC:

The tone of the moderator is notable.

MPP's Ben Morris says it well at The Marijuana Law Tipping Point.

Have you contacted your Representatives lately?

More Americans agree:

Originally posted to Jamaste on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:34 AM PDT.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Zogby Interactive? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    ipso
    The article doesn't say, but if it is, and the sample size implies that it is, then the poll is worthless.
  •  Schwarzenegger's position is, IMO, (11+ / 0-)

    more important than Obama's. We will never see decriminalization or legalization on a national level before a majority of states do it on their own.

    •  But we can't do it unless (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kbman, Arken, EthrDemon

      The FDA changes the schedule.  For that we need the Administration to put a word in the right ear.

      There are bagels in the fridge

      by Sychotic1 on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:54:38 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Agree. (4+ / 0-)

      The federal government won't lead the way on this; it will follow.  (Not unlike gay marriage.)  

      If enough states -- especially big states -- legalize marijuana and start reeling in the tax dollars and don't show an increase in crime or any of the other paranoid fears about what legalization would do, eventually, other states will do the same (especially for the tax dollars), and ultimately, the federal government will have to change to bend to the will of the states.

      Works for me.  Go Ahnold.

      They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.

      by Kaili Joy Gray on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:14:12 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I advocate impatience (17+ / 0-)

    I happen to believe that the prison industry is one of the biggest plagues on democracy this country faces, and it is being fed by weed laws.  There is too much corruption to expect politicians to address this issue rationally.  The people must attack it from the bottom up.  Now is the time.

    •  i advocate both approaches (0+ / 0-)

      either we get it done now, or when the last baby boomer's dead.  time is on our side, and plus our side has the performance-enhancing drugs for the waiting game...

      i don't want no peace, gimme equal rights and justice.

      by keonhp on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:54:09 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Baby boomers? They're our allies (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kbman, C Barr, ImpeachKingBushII, keonhp

        The way I heard it, there's the generation before the Baby Boomers who hardly ever smoked.  They're very old but still very voting.  Then there's the boomers, a lot of whom did smoke or knew smokers.  

        Then there's the Just Say No crowd, and they actually experience a dip in the number of people who smoked.  Probably both because of the Just Say No propoganda and because the generation before them didn't differentiate as much between types of drugs and their effects.

        Then finally there's an uptick on the newest generation of young smokers, kids who understand that marijuana is not heroin and that it is possible to have mind altering experiences and wake up the next morning chemically intact.

        I don't think public perception is going to get much better.  The problem is that so many facets of government- police, justice, immigration, etc. - are getting money directly due to the War on Drugs, to say nothing of all the lobbying opposing stuff like legalizing hemp.  There are just too many politicians either taking money or who know and work with people taking money to expect them to pick up this thing and run with it.  

        Snarka Snarka Snarka!

        by Hunter Huxley on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:03:49 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  To add to your comment on the generation before (8+ / 0-)

          baby boomers ...

          The big difference between these two groups was highlighted by the culture wars of the sixties and seventies (living in a rural red-voting area I'll tell you the war's still ongoing).  To many oldsters and even those younger folk who identify with this group, anybody who smokes marijuana is a dirty fucking hippy.

          Well the recognition of valid medical uses of cannabis have changed this dynamic.  Every adult knows somebody who has died or is suffering from cancer.  Every adult fears that they too will be stricken with cancer and is terrified of enduring a long lingering miserable death.  This fear increases with age.  It is now undeniable that marijuana is often the only working palliative for the misery of terminal cancer with the side effects of chemotherapy.  And imagining being put into this horrible health situation, suddenly marijuana is placed in a new light.  If you can imagine yourself being stricken with cancer, you can imagine yourself needing to smoke pot.  It's not just for DFHs anymore.

          moderation in everything ... including moderation

          by C Barr on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:43:14 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  well, the initial demonization (0+ / 0-)

            was that mexicans smoked it, and seemed to enjoy it, and obviously anything they did must be bad for good white american folk.  hearst was a big spreader of the rumor, you all know the story hemp paper v. wood paper, yadda yadda.

            and obviously i'd prefer to solve the problem sooner than later, but the majority of the anti-mj sentiment does come from a certain generation and older...

            personally i think the approach of dr jeffrey miron is the most sound, the paper he wrote on the economic cost of illegal marijuana has been (and should be) getting a lot of play.  i guess it helps to have the backing of a nobel laureate and 500 economists.

            i don't want no peace, gimme equal rights and justice.

            by keonhp on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:04:42 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

      •  "...or when the last baby boomer's dead" ?... (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        kbman, EthrDemon, Latex Solar Beef, keonhp

        ...thanks for the kick in the nuts, pal. I'm one of those long-haired anti-war hippie freak baby boomers who grew up in the 60s and when it was cool to own your own bong, and when it took real balls to protest in the streets against our government.
        Google: Kent State Massacre. Most of the youngsters I talk to today are for legalizing/decriminalizing pot. But all they do is talk, talk, and more talk. But do they do anything about it except talk? NO! If you really want to change this inane anti-marijuana policy that throws people behind bars for years(they'll never get back!), then it's going to take a lot more than just talk. It's up to you on the front lines who stand to lose the most to hit the streets in protest! It's working for gay marriage! It'll work for legalizing pot, too! I hate to see anyone incarcerated in the penitentiary with hardened criminals(lifers)simply for smoking a joint! In 56 years, I've never seen anyone get robbed, or killed, or drive-byed, or car-jacked so someone could support their pot habit! So the next time you think about how intolerant us old timers are, think about this: we were in your shoes once! And not all of us have to get dead to prove that we're still cool with it!

        "Great men do not commit murder. Great nations do not start wars". William Jennings Bryan

        by ImpeachKingBushII on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:51:35 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  when did it become uncool? (3+ / 0-)

          although i must say, i'm more of a rizla man, myself.

          i'm familiar with kent state, even if i wasn't there myself.  i'm not sure which is worse, though, getting shot or getting renditioned to a black site where they taze yr balls and waterboard you for being an enemy combatant protester.  either way, as i've said many times, y'all can protest, call me for the riots.  until then i'll be helping out from the inside.

          and i know you were in my shoes once (well.  actually no i don't wear birkenstocks anymore ;) ), which is why the intolerance of the boomers bothers me (and a lot of others in my generation) so much.  it's the whole "reformed partier" paradox: a lot of boomers had their fun, started a family, decided that fun wasn't for them anymore and then universalized their little epiphany: fun isn't for anyone else either.

          hope my little kick in the nuts didn't wind you too much, gotta keep that lung capacity up amirite?

          i don't want no peace, gimme equal rights and justice.

          by keonhp on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:17:41 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  •  One thing that's always left out of the legalize (0+ / 0-)

    it debate is WHAT DO WE DO WITH ALL THE LUNG CANCER?  Pot fucks up your lungs.  Do we really want that much more burden on our healthcare system.

    One other thing:  a doped population is a compliant population.  Instead of wasting time on all the legalize pot stuff, let's spend that time and effort on having Americans become true independent thinkers - not hollow ideologues and parrots.

    •  Let's throw fat people in prison, too. (10+ / 0-)

      And stupid people.  You can take the cell with the serial rapist.

      Snarka Snarka Snarka!

      by Hunter Huxley on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:42:57 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Marijuana DOES NOT cause lung cancer (20+ / 0-)

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      Friday, May 26, 2006; A03

      The largest study of its kind has unexpectedly concluded that smoking marijuana, even regularly and heavily, does not lead to lung cancer.

      The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years.

      You're perhaps thinking of that legal drug, tobacco?

      •  also kills brain cancer cells! (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Neon Mama, SmileySam

        i don't want no peace, gimme equal rights and justice.

        by keonhp on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:55:32 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  When I smoked pot, I felt it in my lungs. (0+ / 0-)

        I couldn't run like I always did, and noticed a significant shortness of breath.  I also got a ton more chest colds and bronchitis.

        The only reason pot is said to have no effect on the lungs is because people smoke pot less than they smoke cigs, and a lot of this has to do with it being illegal and its price.  You can bet your ass if people smoked pot on the level they smoke cigs, it would be the same.

        The human lungs were not designed to have ANY kind of smoke and carcinogens in them.  

        •  No one is saying it's completely harmless (8+ / 0-)

          The issue is whether it causes lung cancer. The research seems to suggest it doesn't.

          "You can hold back from the suffering of the world... but perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could have avoided."

          by ipso on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:01:30 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  there you go again, ipso... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            EthrDemon

            with those factos.  :-)

            still trying to win arguments with logic?  that shit's for vulcans!

            hey, how much fun would it be to get high with spock?  (nimoy's spock, i mean... getting high with quinto's spock... well, i'd start seeing sylar in his face and i'd lose it completely...)

            -7.88, -6.97 we are the other people you're the other people, too

            by Latex Solar Beef on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:04:46 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

        •  ...If pot is legal, people wont smoke 20 jays/day (12+ / 0-)

          and by the way, this is NOT the reason that marijuana does not cause cancer. Marijuana does not cause cancer because THC is carcino-suppressive.

          Peer Reviewed Studies showing marijuana poses no cancer risk:

          http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

          The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years.
          "We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

          http://www.webmd.com/...

          According to Ford, he thought he would find an association between marijuana use and cancer, but "that the association would fall away when we corrected for tobacco use. That was not the case. The association was never there."

          http://www.isegoria.net/...

          Marijuana cuts lung cancer tumor growth in half, according to Harvard researchers:

          Other studies disproving the Marijuana cancer link:

          S. Sidney (September 1997). "Marijuana use and cancer incidence (California, United States)". Cancer Causes and Control 8 (5): 722-728.

          J. Huff & P. Chan (October 2000). "Antitumor Effects of THC". Environmental Health Perspectives 108 (10): A442-3.

          K.A. Rosenblatt et al. (1 June 2004). "Marijuana Use and Risk of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma". Cancer Research 64: 4049-4054.

          Parolaro and Massi. 2008. Cannabinoids as a potential new drug therapy for the treatment of gliomas. Expert Reviews of Neurotherapeutics 8: 37-49

          Galanti et al. 2007. Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits cell cycle progression by downregulation of E2F1 in human glioblastoma multiforme cells. Acta Oncologica 12: 1-9.

          Calatozzolo et al. 2007. Expression of cannabinoid receptors and neurotrophins in human gliomas. Neurological Sciences 28: 304-310.

          Ramer and Hinz. 2008. Inhibition of cancer cell invasion by cannabinoids via increased cell expression of tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases-1. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 100: 59-69.

          Preet et al. 2008. Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits epithelial growth factor-induced lung cancer cell migration in vitro as well as its growth and metastasis in vivo. Oncogene 10: 339-346.

          Joint a day keeps alzheimers away

          http://www.webmd.com/...

        •  You should be a medical researcher. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          browneyes, rja

          The ability to sense cancer would be very useful in that field.

          Snarka Snarka Snarka!

          by Hunter Huxley on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:25:37 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  You cannot be serious. (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sychotic1, kbman, huntergeo

          Anecdotal evidence? Ok, I have some of my own.

          I smoke most days.  Sometimes every day, multiple times.  I also work out several times a week.  I notice no shortness of breath while doing my cardio and haven't had a chest cold or bronchitis for years.  Therefore, pot is totally harmless!!!

          Sounds fairly ridiculous, because it is.

          You speak with certainty, yet provide no evidence to back-up your absurd claims.  Millions of Americans and millions more around the world smoke daily, several times a day.  All the current, available scientific evidence, which has been extensively cited here by others for your education, shows no link between lung cancer and heavy, regular use.  Some studies even suggest it helps PREVENT it.

          If you had any idea what you're talking about, you would also know that marijuana being illegal is the most minor inconvenience for people wishing to obtain some.  It's not difficult or even an issue for most.  It's also no more expensive than a cigarette smoker with a standard pack a day habit.  Probably less, actually.  I don't smoke cigarettes, but I know a pack is at least 5 bucks, meaning $35 a week or more.  

          You can bet YOUR ass that it's where you're pulling all this nonsense from.

          We are star stuff which has taken its destiny into its own hands. The loom of time and space works the most astonishing transformations of matter. - Carl Sagan

          by aclockworkprple on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:54:29 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Uh, Frankie didn't mention lung cancer (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            aclockworkprple

            If you observe something happening to you, it happened.  A hundred other people saying that it didn't happen to them does not negate the fact that you observed it happen to you.

            Some time ago a M.D. commented on one of these threads that he has several patients suffering from obstructive pulmonary disease induced by their marijuana habit.  Smoking anything kills the cilia that remove mucus and particulates from the lungs.  A chronic cough is common in many heavy marijuana users.

            moderation in everything ... including moderation

            by C Barr on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:05:45 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Sure he did. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              C Barr

              In the comment that started this thread.  All his posts except the one I replied to specifically mention cancer.  Seems fair to me that when he says

              The only reason pot is said to have no effect on the lungs is because people smoke pot less than they smoke cigs, and a lot of this has to do with it being illegal and its price.  You can bet your ass if people smoked pot on the level they smoke cigs, it would be the same.

              he's referring to cancer, given the context of his other posts on the subject.  Maybe he's not, I could certainly be wrong.  Wouldn't be the first time.

              I agree with your point that observing something happening to you doesn't mean it didn't happen or isn't useful to the individual.  My point was that personal anecdotal evidence isn't useful in determining the health risks associated with marijuana use for the larger population in general.  There could have been any number of factors influencing his experiences, same as mine.

              I'll have to look into this business about obstructive pulmonary disease, I haven't heard anything about this prior.  Do you have a direction to point me in or should I just hop on The Google?

              I also 100% agree with the 2nd paragraph of your post right below this.  The legalization situation seems to be a frustrating catch-22.  If possession wasn't illegal in most states, it would be easier to do research.  Extensive research would make it easier to provide a solid case for legalization.  Argh.

              We are star stuff which has taken its destiny into its own hands. The loom of time and space works the most astonishing transformations of matter. - Carl Sagan

              by aclockworkprple on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:28:10 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  Thank you for your well reasoned reply (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                aclockworkprple

                I'll search around for the emphasema references but I have other obligations now.

                moderation in everything ... including moderation

                by C Barr on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:50:11 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                •  No worries. (2+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  kbman, C Barr

                  I certainly don't expect you to go running around providing links for me, just if you had it immediately handy it could save some time.

                  But yes, I do have the somewhat regrettable habit of responding to anti-marijuana reactionaries with equal parts derision and sarcasm.  If I had to take a guess, it's the result of having thoroughly debunked and disproven (at least as far as the current research takes us) talking points thrown at me repeatedly for a couple years, and this is a subject on which I'm passionate about.  For reasons other than the fact that I'm a fan of the good herb. That's just one of them. =)

                  Enjoy your weekend!

                  We are star stuff which has taken its destiny into its own hands. The loom of time and space works the most astonishing transformations of matter. - Carl Sagan

                  by aclockworkprple on Fri May 08, 2009 at 12:17:48 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

        •  Frankie, I don't doubt your self observations (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          huntergeo

          regarding your lungs.  But evidence is accumulating that smoking pot is not associated with lung cancer.  Smoking pot is associated with obstructive lung disease such as emphasema.  Those who deny it are in denial.  And some people do smoke a lot of pot with definite ill effects ... That's a fact.  Self moderation and vaporizers can be promoted by many commenters here, but it is a fact that some folks develop a dependancy and smoke too much for their own good with negative effects upon their lives.

          But do you think that arresting these people doesn't have a profound negative impact upon their lives?  We don't throw tobacco smokers in jail and give them career ruining criminal records.  Any alcoholic or heavy tobacco user can seek medical counseling without any fear of recrimination.  If marijuana possession wasn't illegal then we could actually get some legitimate research done and we wouldn't be having these debates because there would actually be a solid body of data to refer to.

          moderation in everything ... including moderation

          by C Barr on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:58:35 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yeah, you could just see ... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          kbman, GillesDeleuze

          ... Michael Phelps struggling to those eight gold fukkin medals.

    •  Except you don't have to smoke it. (13+ / 0-)

      You can eat it, vaporize it, drink it... all sorts of other ways to use it.

      But I'm sure that doesn't concern you.

    •  WON"T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE LUNG CANCER?! (8+ / 0-)

      What talking points. I really want to throw a donut...

      If man could be crossed with the cat, it would improve man, but it would deteriorate the cat.

      by Amayi on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:47:35 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  INFORM YOURSELF (7+ / 0-)

      Marijuana does not cause cancer.

      Marijuana prevents cancer.

      Marijuana stunts tumor growth.

    •  No cancer connection- (9+ / 0-)

      There's been no connection between even heavy pot smoking and lung cancer:

      While a clear increase in cancer risk was seen among cigarette smokers in the study, no such association was seen for regular cannabis users.

      Even very heavy, long-term marijuana users who had smoked more than 22,000 joints over a lifetime seemed to have no greater risk than infrequent marijuana users or nonusers.

      The findings surprised the study’s researchers, who expected to see an increase in cancer among people who smoked marijuana regularly in their youth.

      Yes, I know the link is Fox News, which I don't normally cite, but if even the idiots at Fox can figure it out, perhaps you could, too!

      Do your homework rather than parroting John Walters thoroughly debunked talking points!

      Why d'ya think they call it GOP?

      by Red no more on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:48:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  By the way, only someone who has never used it (10+ / 0-)

      could think marijuana inhibits independent thought since the truth is exactly the opposite.

      •  Haha yes (7+ / 0-)

        All the potheads I know are way into maintaining the status quo!

        "You can hold back from the suffering of the world... but perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could have avoided."

        by ipso on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:54:55 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  My buddies and I (6+ / 0-)

          have a session and then go to Wal-Mart.

          Science is whatever we want it to be.

          by als10 on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:58:31 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  Best argument against it- (9+ / 0-)

          Carl Sagan not only smoked pot, but attributed some of his discoveries to its influence on his mind.

          http://tywkiwdbi.blogspot.com/...

          •  Ah, Carl. (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Arken, browneyes

            How I miss him.  Now I feel like I need to get lifted and watch some Cosmos, have my mind blown for a couple hours.

            It really says something when Carl Mother Fucking Sagan, probably one of the more brilliant minds of the 20th century, was a big advocate, even if he published in secret.  The creator of the Voyager Golden Record, author of The Demon Haunted World, creator of Cosmos.  The man has been a bigger influence on me than I can possibly convey.  As evidenced by my signature.  He had a gift for explaining just how truly incredible the universe and evolution of life is with easy to understand concepts and language.  We sure could use someone like that right now.  Tyson doesn't do it for me.  Michio Kaku seems to do a pretty good job, though he could use a wider audience.  And now I'm rambling!

            We are star stuff which has taken its destiny into its own hands. The loom of time and space works the most astonishing transformations of matter. - Carl Sagan

            by aclockworkprple on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:26:00 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  I was watching Cosmos the other day- (3+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              csquared, browneyes, aclockworkprple

              You can watch it via Google Video.

              I was thinking that someone should do a 'special edition' of Cosmos like Lucas did with Star Wars. The only thing that was hard to watch with it was some of the effects. I know they were groundbreaking at the time, but from a 2009 perspective, a lot of them look terrible.

              •  I own the entire series on DVD. (0+ / 0-)

                Its a prized possession to be sure.  I've used it to create more than a few fans among my circle of friends.

                I know the version I have includes the updates he did 10 years later, and also includes Hubble images spliced in at points.  It doesn't alter the overall show very significantly, mostly just provides a bit of additional visual flair.  But for me, the early 80s special effects are part of the charm.  I love the cheese.  

                We are star stuff which has taken its destiny into its own hands. The loom of time and space works the most astonishing transformations of matter. - Carl Sagan

                by aclockworkprple on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:07:25 AM PDT

                [ Parent ]

          •  and he smoked... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            GillesDeleuze

            billions and billions of joints.

            (someone had to say it.)

            -7.88, -6.97 we are the other people you're the other people, too

            by Latex Solar Beef on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:09:01 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            •  Someone had to... (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Jamaste, Latex Solar Beef

              ...but he never did, apparently.  At least, until he wrote Billions and Billions:

              I never said it. Honest. Oh, I said there are maybe 100 billion galaxies and 10 billion trillion stars. It's hard to talk about the Cosmos without using big numbers. I said 'billion' many times on the Cosmos television series, which was seen by a great many people. But I never said 'billions and billions.' For one thing, it's imprecise. How many billions are 'billions and billions'? A few billion? Twenty billion? A hundred billion? 'Billions and billions' is pretty vague... For a while, out of childish pique, I wouldn't utter the phrase, even when asked to. But I've gotten over that. So, for the record, here it goes: 'Billions and billions.'

              =)

              We are star stuff which has taken its destiny into its own hands. The loom of time and space works the most astonishing transformations of matter. - Carl Sagan

              by aclockworkprple on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:34:32 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              •  true, and... (0+ / 0-)

                cary grant never uttered "judy, judy, judy" and humphrey bogart never said "play it again, sam."  and yet somehow these phrases become part of our lexicon.

                not to mention al gore never said he invented the internet... :-)

                -7.88, -6.97 we are the other people you're the other people, too

                by Latex Solar Beef on Fri May 08, 2009 at 12:39:26 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

      •  Right on. I'm very sucessful and... (6+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        MA Liberal, kbman, Arken, csquared, browneyes, Amayi

        it has aided my creative thought processes.

        I know many other successful businessmen who use marijuana and would do so openly if it were legalized, but have to hide it because of the draconian laws on this herb.

    •  Harvard Sutdy: Marijuana cuts lung cancer by 50% (14+ / 0-)

      Peer Reviewed Studies showing marijuana poses no cancer risk:

      http://www.washingtonpost.com/...

      The new findings "were against our expectations," said Donald Tashkin of the University of California at Los Angeles, a pulmonologist who has studied marijuana for 30 years.
      "We hypothesized that there would be a positive association between marijuana use and lung cancer, and that the association would be more positive with heavier use," he said. "What we found instead was no association at all, and even a suggestion of some protective effect."

      http://www.webmd.com/...

      According to Ford, he thought he would find an association between marijuana use and cancer, but "that the association would fall away when we corrected for tobacco use. That was not the case. The association was never there."

      http://www.isegoria.net/...

      Marijuana cuts lung cancer tumor growth in half, according to Harvard researchers:

      Other studies disproving the Marijuana cancer link:

      S. Sidney (September 1997). "Marijuana use and cancer incidence (California, United States)". Cancer Causes and Control 8 (5): 722-728.

      J. Huff & P. Chan (October 2000). "Antitumor Effects of THC". Environmental Health Perspectives 108 (10): A442-3.

      K.A. Rosenblatt et al. (1 June 2004). "Marijuana Use and Risk of Oral Squamous Cell Carcinoma". Cancer Research 64: 4049-4054.

      Parolaro and Massi. 2008. Cannabinoids as a potential new drug therapy for the treatment of gliomas. Expert Reviews of Neurotherapeutics 8: 37-49

      Galanti et al. 2007. Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits cell cycle progression by downregulation of E2F1 in human glioblastoma multiforme cells. Acta Oncologica 12: 1-9.

      Calatozzolo et al. 2007. Expression of cannabinoid receptors and neurotrophins in human gliomas. Neurological Sciences 28: 304-310.

      Ramer and Hinz. 2008. Inhibition of cancer cell invasion by cannabinoids via increased cell expression of tissue inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases-1. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 100: 59-69.

      Preet et al. 2008. Delta9-Tetrahydrocannabinol inhibits epithelial growth factor-induced lung cancer cell migration in vitro as well as its growth and metastasis in vivo. Oncogene 10: 339-346.

      Joint a day keeps alzheimers away

      http://www.webmd.com/...

    •  By all means, catapult the propaganda (5+ / 0-)
      First, the instance of lung cancer among pot smokers is a tiny fraction of the instance of lung cancer among cigarette smokers.

      Secondly, the rising availability and popularity of baked goods and vaporizers have significantly reduced those kinds of risks.

      "We are loaded today." - Rush Limbaugh

      by The Termite on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:59:16 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  has a study been done (0+ / 0-)

        with vaporized tobacco to determine if the carcinogenic effect is reduced when not burned?

        -7.88, -6.97 we are the other people you're the other people, too

        by Latex Solar Beef on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:11:38 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I've heard (though never seen proof, haven't (0+ / 0-)

          looked into it) that laborers on tobacco farms used to develop all sorts of other cancers, as in not lung but skin, from handling the tobacco plants.  Probably BS, but if true then it might help to answer that question.

          Personally, I wouldn't care if it did reduce or eliminate the cancer-link, I won't be going back to nicotine ;)  My GF on the other hand...well she just ain't ready, I think, to quit cigarettes, so she'd probably be interested :P

        •  You can't vape tobacco (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Latex Solar Beef

          Vaporizing is a technique that exploits the difference in combustion temperatures between THC crystals (which form on the outside of the plant matter) and the plant matter itself.  So you're not inhaling burnt plant smoke and all that garbage; you're just inhaling THC in gaseous form.

          There's no analog to tobacco.

          "We are loaded today." - Rush Limbaugh

          by The Termite on Fri May 08, 2009 at 12:51:50 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  But cigarettes to much more harm (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kbman, browneyes

      and we can't make those illegal, so why not allow pot? Reports are out that show pot actually can be beneficial to the lungs. The reports of lung cancer in pot smokers were smokers of tobacco as well.
      Bottom line is, prohibition does not work. It didn't for alcohol, it isn't for drugs and it won't for cigarettes.

      Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

      by MA Liberal on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:00:30 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  BS! (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kbman, browneyes, GillesDeleuze
      ...a doped population is a compliant population.

      The population is already doped up and non-compliant.

      "War is a Racket" - MajGen Smedley D. Butler, USMC(ret)

      by PvtJarHead on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:08:41 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  RE: Doped-up population (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kbman, browneyes

      How many scrips is the average senior citizen on? About 18, you say? Hmm...

      "You can hold back from the suffering of the world... but perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could have avoided."

      by ipso on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:12:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah, thank god cigarettes are illegal. (7+ / 0-)

      Oh.  Never mind.

      They tortured people to get false confessions to fraudulently justify our invading Iraq.

      by Kaili Joy Gray on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:15:08 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Pot lung cancer is false meme. (0+ / 0-)

      If anything, what tiny amount of actual scientific study which has occured - hints more at pot use as a slight deterence to cancer.  Sorry - about not having time to find link.

      Meme is also IRRELEPHANT because pot can be ingested without smoking.

      De fund + de bunk = de EXIT--->>>>>

      by Neon Mama on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:24:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  Almost anything is better (11+ / 0-)

    Than continuing to fill out jails with nonviolent drug offenders.

    "You can hold back from the suffering of the world... but perhaps this very holding back is the one suffering you could have avoided."

    by ipso on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:43:04 AM PDT

  •  I love a good musical dance number (4+ / 0-)

    That bag of weed video is great.

    Once in a while you get shown the light in the strangest of places if you look at it right.

    by darthstar on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:53:53 AM PDT

  •  Alcohol or Pot which is worse physiologically... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    MA Liberal, Blueiz, kbman

    I believe everyone knows how much worse on the body alcohol is.

    Moreover,the drug companies just don't like the idea that people can grow their own medicine (pot).

    "We are a Plutocracy, we ought to face it. We need, desperately, to find new ways to hear independent voices & points of view" Ramsey Clark, US AG

    by Mr SeeMore on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:55:54 AM PDT

  •  It will happen (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Blueiz, kbman, Latex Solar Beef

    but the position Obama's in, I can see why he's not moving on it right now. first, there are many problems on his plate. You can imagine how the right wing noise machine would go off on it if Obama advocated legalizing drugs right now.
    I think his strategy (and remember he is thinking long term) is to let the dialog go on until it reaches a point where he can agree and move forward.
    I also think that things like legalization will wait for his second term. That way he can do it without worrying about having to run for re-election.
    It sucks to have to wait. But America has been brainwashed about drugs for so long it's not going to be easy to change their minds.
    I just hope we can get there soon. We're wasting too much money on the bogus War on Drugs and could make so much from taxation it only makes sense to legalize.

    Electing conservatives is like hiring a carpenter who thinks hammers are evil.

    by MA Liberal on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:57:46 AM PDT

  •  I am all for legalization (8+ / 0-)

    I haven't touched the stuff in over 20 years but I do not understand why it should be illegal.

    I live in California and since it is our number one cash crop, pot is cheap, easy to find and good quality.  People of all ages, professions, income levels smoke it.  Most of my friends only use it on an occassional level (two or three times a year).

    There are bagels in the fridge

    by Sychotic1 on Fri May 08, 2009 at 09:57:54 AM PDT

  •  Dude's and Dudette's (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1, kbman

    Isn't it about time we end the Reagan policy of Endless War on Drugs?

    We dont neeed, no more trubles ~Bob Marley

    by joeshwingding on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:06:23 AM PDT

  •  An adult discussion about IV:XX? (5+ / 0-)

    I'll believe it when I see it, when we stop allowing the Authoritarian class stop framing the argument, stop relying on junk "science" and take an honest accounting of the cost of this destructive "war on personal liberties and freedom".

    Sic gorgiamus allos subjectatos nunc -7.25 -8.15

    by mydailydrunk on Fri May 08, 2009 at 10:07:04 AM PDT

  •  Civil disobedience and publicity stunts. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    EthrDemon

    Get some impeccable, angelic person respected and admired by everyone who isn't nuts, and get them to smoke marijuana in public and purposely get arrested for it.  When they go to court, have them refuse to pay the fine or accept probation.  They'll be found in contempt or given a light jail sentence, like a couple of weeks - publicize it heavily, and show how ridicuous it is that someone is in jail who did nothing wrong.

    "Water can flow, or it can crash. Be water, my friend." -Bruce Lee

    by Troubadour on Fri May 08, 2009 at 11:15:31 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site