Steve G.

Posts Tagged ‘alcohol’

Cindy McCain: Drug Dealer

In Activism, Drug War, Entertainment, Humor, Libertarian, Media, People in the news, Politics, Presidential Candidates, Republican on August 6, 2008 at 5:01 pm

What is the difference between potential future First Lady
Cindy McCain and a MARIJUANA dealer?

Cindy deals a more harmful drug: ALCOHOL

That’s right, Cindy McCain — wife of presumptive presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) — is an alcohol dealer. As the the chairperson and majority shareholder of Hensley & Co., one of the nation’s largest distributors of Anheuser-Busch beer, she made a fortune dealing more than 23 million cases of beer last year.

Whereas selling millions of dollars worth of alcohol could land Cindy in the White House, selling just a few hundred or thousand dollars worth of marijuana continues to land countless Americans in the big house (prison, that is). This is despite the fact that marijuana is FAR less harmful than alcohol both to the user and to society.

“Cindy McCain: Drug Dealer” is a provocative new campaign designed to highlight this hypocrisy and spread the message that marijuana is safer than alcohol and should be treated that way.

CLICK HERE to check it out or go to:


Featured on the site is a short yet hilarious Web ad called “Drug-Deal-Er,” which is a play on the old Budweiser frogs commercials. (A huge thanks goes out Paul Saurini for helping us produce this great video.) Also on the site is information on Cindy McCain’s lucrative drug dealing empire, the facts about marijuana compared to alcohol, and PDFs of the Cindy “WANTED” poster that we would love to see posted everywhere!

Word of the campaign has already traveled quickly, spreading from the blogosphere (such as this piece on The Raw Story) to the mainstream media (such as this story in today’s Denver Post). We expect it will continue to grow, especially after our press conference today in front of the Hensley Cartel’s Headquarters in Phoenix, Arizona!


WE NEED YOUR HELP to spread it further!


Please visit DrugDealerCindy.com today and:


Sign the on-line petition and forward it to all of your friends, family, and coworkers.

Download and print Cindy “WANTED” posters to hang around your
community, in your office, or simply on your refrigerator. We need to get these up EVERYWHERE!

Watch SAFER’s original “Drug-Deal-Er” video and share it with everyone you can.

Contact us to find out how you can do more to spread the word in your area and/or on the Web!

Make a donation to help us buy more ads and reach a larger national audience.
Cindy “WANTED” poster ads are currently featured on some major national blogs and on more than a dozen of the most popular statewide political blogs around the country (click HERE for an example). We only had enough in our budget to buy ads for one week, though, and we need your help to keep them (and new ones) up and running.



This is NOT an attack on Cindy McCain or alcohol!

SAFER certainly realizes the “Cindy McCain: Drug Dealer” campaign will raise some eyebrows. After all, that’s the point. But we trust you — and the public in general — will understand that this is NOT a personal attack on Cindy McCain and it is certainly not a partisan thing (as you may recall, SAFER also labeled Denver’s Democratic brewpub-owning mayor John Hickenlooper a “Drug Dealer”).

Cindy is proud of her job and her industry, and alcohol use and sales are widely accepted in this country. Why is highlighting them an “attack” or negative in any way? In fact, we hope to get the public and the media thinking about just why it seems so crazy to call someone who sells alcohol a “drug dealer,” whereas there seems to be no problem using the term for those who sell marijuana.

We should also point out that SAFER is NOT attacking alcohol. As we’ve said time and time again, we respect the right of adults to use alcohol responsibly. We are simply standing up for the millions of Americans our government punishes and considers criminals just because they make the SAFER choice to use marijuana for relaxation and recreation.



PLEASE FORWARD this message widely!

Many thanks to Steve Kubby for forwarding this to LFV!

Advertisements

Man foregoes snake oil, sells snake vodka instead

In Courts and Justice System, Crime, Drug War, Entertainment, Health, Humor, Law, Law Enforcement, People in the news, Politics, Science, Shine on you crazy diamond on April 1, 2008 at 11:44 pm

Snake vodkaI couldn’t help but chuckle a bit when I read this. This is such a novelty that I’m quite sure that many people would pay top dollar for it, but not as an ancient Asian elixir. They’d buy it because it’s a bottle of vodka with a doggone rattlesnake in it, LOL.

Still, I don’t see the harm, as long as the snake’s venom doesn’t poison people who drink the beverage (though I will also note that later in the story, Bayou Bob admits that “I’ve honestly never seen a person drink it”). The state doesn’t say anything about it possibly poisoning anyone though; they’re just upset because he doesn’t have a liquor license. So it appears that the state is just worried about getting their cut.

A rattlesnake rancher who calls himself Bayou Bob found a new way to make money: Stick a rattler inside a bottle of vodka and market the concoction as an “ancient Asian elixir.” But Bayou Bob Popplewell’s bright idea appears to have landed him on the wrong side of the law, because he has no liquor license.

Popplewell, who has raised rattlesnakes and turtles at Bayou Bob’s Brazos River Rattlesnake Ranch for more than two decades, surrendered to authorities Monday. He spent about 10 minutes in jail after the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission obtained arrest warrants on misdemeanor charges of selling alcohol without a license and possessing alcohol with intent to sell.

If convicted, he faces up to a year in jail and $1,000 in fines.

Popplewell said he will fight the charges. His intent, he said, is not to sell an alcoholic beverage but a healing tonic. He said he has customers of Asian descent who believe the concoction has medicinal properties.

“It’s almost a spiritual thing,” said Popplewell, 63.

But alcohol commission agent Scott Jones pointed out that investigators confiscated 429 bottles of snake vodka and one bottle of snake tequila. At $23 a bottle, that’s almost $10,000 worth of reptilian booze.

Even if Popplewell intended his drink be used as a healing tonic — an assertion the alcohol commission disputes — his use of vodka requires a state permit, authorities said.

adsonar_placementId=1280488;adsonar_pid=43749;adsonar_ps=-1;adsonar_zw=165;adsonar_zh=220;adsonar_jv=’ads.adsonar.com’;

“It’s sold for beverage purposes, and he knows what he’s doing,” commission Sgt. Charlie Cloud said.

You can read the rest of this interesting article here.

A Conversation With Mike Gravel

In Civil Liberties, Congress, Constitutional Rights, Courts and Justice System, Crime, Democracy, Democrats, Drug War, Global Warming, History, Iraq War, Law, Libertarian, Libertarian Convention, Libertarian Party-US, Medical Marijuana, Politics, Presidential Candidates, Second Amendment, Taxation, US Government on March 28, 2008 at 1:21 am

Mike GravelEarlier today, I had an opportunity to speak by telephone with Senator Mike Gravel, a presidential candidate who has switched from the Democratic Party to the Libertarian Party. Senator Gravel welcomed my questions, and I had a very positive impression of him. He is extremely well spoken, and quite passionate about many of the issues near and dear to the Libertarian Party.

My purpose, of course, was to ascertain why he decided to switch parties, and whether he truly holds Libertarian views as opposed to only conveniently holding libertarian views in order to get the LP nomination. I quickly discovered that his most basic belief, which he has provably held for over 30 years, is thoroughly libertarian: the right of the American people to bypass and even overturn Congress and the President, when those elected officials act in contradiction to the will of the people.

Senator Gravel believes that “the American people are not empowered to do anything, and this is wrong.” He therefore believes Americans should have the ability to directly make laws through federal ballot initiatives. At present, many states allow citizens to present laws directly through initiatives which, if supported widely enough, will be placed on the ballot to potentially become law; an example of this is Proposition 215, which legalized medical marijuana in California. Senator Gravel believes citizens should be able to do the same thing on the federal level, under his National Initiative For Democracy.

The government is a tool, the people can use it. But if the people have the direct power to use it, then you’re going to see the government as a real tool, not the tool you have when the special interests determine how the tool of government is handled, by the lobbyists, who pay for the campaigns, who manipulate you to vote for them. That’s the process that has to change.

When he says that the government has the duty to release information to the public, so they can make sound decisions, he is not blowing smoke, nor is he promoting something he hasn’t already done himself. During the Vietnam War, Senator Gravel released the Pentagon Papers, reading thousands of pages into the Congressional Record, so that Americans would finally know the truth behind that war; and his defiance, by informing Americans of information which was previously viewed as classified, was a pivotal moment in American history.

Under his National Initiative For Democracy we, as citizens, could end the war, end the federal income tax, or pass a federal law allowing Americans to carry guns openly; we could make any law we want, as long as there is sufficient citizen support for it. Senator Gravel says that “the real power in this country does not lie with the leadership, with Congress or with the President; it lies with you, the American citizen”. This program would in fact become an important part of the checks and balances system, which Senator Gravel believes should have been in force from the beginning, so citizens could more easily keep Congress and the President in check.

Of course, when he was running for President in the Democratic Party, the Democrats weren’t very happy with that idea. I asked the Senator whether they oppose it because it threatens their power, or if they oppose it because they believe the average American is unable to make sound legislative decisions. He immediately replied, “Both.” He went on to explain that “the average person in Congress believes they are more intelligent than the average American, and there are a few in Congress who are very intelligent; but at the same time the average American is smarter than the average Congressman, and perfectly capable of making sound decisions.”

His suspicion of the leading presidential candidates was made clear when he said, “Don’t trust anyone who says they have all the answers. Nobody has all the answers; I don’t have all the answers. But the American public knows what is best for them, and I trust them to make those decisions.”

Talking war with Senator Gravel, for someone my age who lived during Vietnam, is like getting into a time machine, and going back to the last destructive war this country faced, when he forced a filibuster to end the draft, and thus end the Vietnam war. Senator Gravel was a maverick, and he defied Congress again and again.

As you may recall, even before we sent troops to Iraq, he warned the American public that there were no WMDs in Iraq. I asked him why, in his opinion, President Bush lied about the presence of WMDs. “Oil. He wanted to get control of the oil, and it’s all just more American imperialism and the military-industrial complex.” He went a step further, and agreed that Bush and Cheney should not only be impeached, but that they should face trial for war crimes. “Americans must stop thinking we’re above the law,” he stated. He believes that the United States should stop getting involved in foreign conflicts altogether, and “stop being the world’s policeman”.

Senator Gravel is completely against the War on Drugs, which he categorizes as a failure. “We spend 50 to 85 billion dollars a year on a drug war that does no good to anybody other than criminalizing people who shouldn’t be criminals. We have 2.3 million people in jail right now, and half of them shouldn’t even be in jail …. if you want marijuana, why not go to a package store? A fifth of gin will do more damage to you, to your health, than will a pack of marijuana. As for the rest of the drugs, why not legalize them and regulate them? We put addicts in jail when they aren’t criminals, but there they learn to be better criminals, to steal and commit crime to feed their habit. It’s a public health problem, and we need to solve it as a public health problem, and save all this money we’re spending to keep people in jail for drugs, $30,000 a year for each of them.”

He is therefore in support of decriminalizing and regulating all drugs. “If you need to get some coke, go to a doctor and get a prescription. If you’re an addict, you’ll have to register so we can help you. But the way we do it now, we catch you with drugs, we throw you in jail, and you don’t get any help.”

With regard to whether legalizing all drugs would increase addiction, he states, “That’s what they told us about alcohol, during Prohibition. Alcohol is more addictive than marijuana. Should you go to jail for having marijuana, when you don’t go to jail for having whiskey and alcohol? It’s a stupid policy, it’s gutless, and it’s damaging our inner cities. Seventy percent of the people in jail are African-Americans, and most of it is for drugs. It’s gutless on the part of our leaders to not solve this, to not treat it as a public health problem rather than a criminal problem ….. For those who say we have a drug problem, yeah, we have a problem, and it’s with stupidity at the highest levels of our government.”

As for those in prison for drug offenses, he would educate nonviolent drug offenders – whether it’s a college degree or technical training – then grant them a full pardon so they can not only be released from prison, but also have the tools they need to immediately become fully productive members of society.

He is for Second Amendment rights, saying “I have a weapon, and I’ll fight to keep it.” Insofar as how openly Americans should be able to carry weapons, he referred me back to the federal ballot initiative, saying that the American people should decide that issue.

When I asked him about reducing the size of government as well as its spending, he agreed that it has gotten completely out of hand, and that severe cutbacks should be made. The first steps would be dismantling the IRS (which would no longer be needed with his national sales tax program), and the “War On Drugs” arm of the DEA (since all drugs would be legalized). He also believes that “if we empower the people to make laws, they will shrink the government.”

I could actually hear the thrill in his voice when one question pointed out that libertarians are, by and large, for open borders. He believes that we have so many illegal immigrants here because our own laws caused them to not have work available in their own country; he states that 1.3 million farming jobs were lost in Mexico when NAFTA was passed. For that reason, he believes repealing NAFTA would cure most of the illegal immigration, as more jobs are created in their home countries. As for those who are already here and don’t want to leave, he wants to simply “put them on the path to citizenship.” He believes that we should create completely open borders, similar to what is in place in Europe, whereby citizens could cross into or from Canada or Mexico, with no questions asked.

It is undeniable that the federal government is deeply in debt, and must raise revenue. Senator Gravel, however, is opposed to the income tax, since it over-taxes the poor and middle-class, and grossly undertaxes the wealthy. He therefore proposes dismantling the IRS altogether. He would replace the income tax with a 23% sales tax, and give a rebate each month to every American family to pay for necessities. Senator Gravel believes that this would allow the poor and middle class, who spend mostly on necessities such as food and housing, to have far more disposable income. He believes this program will create the same amount of federal revenue, but in a manner which is far more fair to the poor and working class.

“I don’t know whether it’s a step to end taxation, but at this point it is a good way to fund needed revenue. Right now we tax income and investments, and investment income is taxed at a lower rate than income. We don’t tax the wealthy, and that’s what’s wrong with our system.” He again reiterated that the American people could make the final decision regarding whether federal taxation should eventually end, through his ballot initiative program.

Senator Gravel believes that Social Security funds should be left alone, rather than used by the government for other purposes as is now the norm. At this point, most Americans have already paid into Social Security. He wants everyone’s Social Security funds invested in the free market, and he wants everyone to get an accounting of their money and interest earned, just as if they had invested it with a bank; and if they die before spending what they have invested and earned, he believes that the surplus in their Social Security account should go to their heirs.

As for private investments, he believes his sales tax program with refunds for necessities will give the average American the additional funds needed to save in an IRA or other investment vehicle, as additional retirement savings to supplement what they have already put into Social Security.

He is aware that many libertarians are against Universal Health Care, but believes his plan will meet libertarian standards. He came up with the idea of a Healthcare Security System 30 years ago. Senator Gravel pointed out that he knows the healthcare system “up front and personal”. One year, he ended up with over $150,000 in healthcare costs, and went bankrupt as a result.

He believes the Democratic health care plan, wherein businesses are forced to provide health insurance for their employees, is “the wrong way to go, because it is not the responsibility of businesses to provide healthcare; their job is to be competitive in the global marketplace.” So instead, he wants to enact a Universal Single Payor Voucher plan, similar to the plan which the Veterans Administration has in place. Every American would be given a health care voucher. The vouchers would have a very modest co-pay, and a very modest deductible. Americans would have their choice of hospitals, their choice of doctors, and a choice of five or six plans. There would be no exclusions for preexisting conditions.

He doesn’t think we need to raise taxes in order to provide health care for all Americans; we just need to make our healthcare system considerably more efficient than it is at present. He believes that if we computerize healthcare records, it will streamline the system, because he says 30% of healthcare cost is in paperwork. He intends to provide every American with basic healthcare services, and if they want more or different coverage, they can choose to buy additional or supplemental plans in the free market.

He is aware of Ron Paul’s belief that the Federal Reserve is responsible for the inflationary effects which are harmful to poor and middle-class Americans. Senator Gravel wants to reexamine the Federal Reserve, and study the gold standard with an eye toward a global monetary system, which will better protect the value of our money in a global marketplace.

Senator Gravel was pivotal in shepherding the Alaska Pipeline though Congress, but at this point he would oppose any effort to drill for oil in the Alaskan Wildlife Preserve. He states that instead, he wants us to end our dependence upon oil within five years. His goal would be to replace oil with alternative energy sources.

I asked Senator Gravel if there was any one moment – a light bulb moment, if you will – in which he realized that he was a libertarian. He stated, “Not really. It’s an awareness that goes back 30, 40 years, that the best way to to change things was from inside, within the power structure. Now, it’s time for a change. I am joining the Libertarian Party to become its presidential nominee. I can take the Libertarian Party to a level they’ve never been before. I am against war, I am against taxing income, I am against the war on drugs. I am for smaller government, open borders, and the ability of the American people to self-govern. I am a libertarian. I scored seven out of seven on Reason’s “Seven Ways To Win Votes” – I am for internet gambling, for medical marijuana (but I go much further than that, by decriminalizing all drugs) …. so I’m more libertarian than Ron Paul, because he scored lower. And I will work very hard as the Libertarian Party’s candidate, I will get the libertarians the national playing field they need to grow. And not just libertarians, either. I will raise the playing field for all third parties.”

All in all, Senator Gravel impressed me as sincere, intelligent, and passionate about libertarian issues. I did not at all get the impression that he is a pseudo-libertarian; I think he’s the real deal, because his actions even decades ago indicated that he is a libertarian. He left the Democratic Party because he realized that they are not receptive to his ballot initiative plan, and are not in agreement with his healthcare plan, his opposition to the War on Drugs, and many other issues. He has the presence, he has the speaking ability and dynamic personality, and he has the name recognition and contacts to place us on a more even playing field.

The Democrats’ loss may very well be our gain.

Senator Gravel suggested that those interested in more information about his views read his book “Citizen Power: A Mandate For Change”, which can be ordered online here. It is also available on Amazon.com, but their new book price is actually several dollars higher than the price on his website. Amazon’s description of the book is as follows.

As author of Citizen Power in 1971, Senator Mike Gravel determined that much of what he wrote then is apropos in America today; hence, the release of Citizen Power: A Mandate for Change that reflects the accuracy of his evaluation of problems then, his current position on a number of issues facing America now, and the process that Americans can undertake to become empowered as lawmakers in partnership with their elected officials. Most chapters of Citizen Power: A Mandate for Change present material from the original book, as well as new information and revised positions. The exceptions are Chapter 2: The National Initiative, and Chapter 7: The War on Drugs. All other chapters cover similar topics in both books, but with the senator’s fresh insights for today’s world. Each chapter ends with how the National Initiative, once enacted, could help solve the problems presented in that chapter. The Table of Contents is as follows: Chapter 1 – Now It’s the Citizen’s Turn Chapter 2 – The National Initiative Chapter 3 – America’s Failure in Education Chapter 4 – Tax Reform – The Fair Tax Chapter 5 – The Health Security System Chapter 6 – National Environmental & Energy Policy Chapter 7 – The War on Drugs Chapter 8 – Crime & Punishment Chapter 9 – The Shroud of Secrecy Chapter 10 – American Imperialism Chapter 11 – Global Governance Chapter 12 – Who Stole the American Dream?

All three customer reviews give the book five stars. There is a “look inside the book” feature, and based on that material and given that it was originally written in 1971, then updated recently, I don’t think there is any real question whether Senator Gravel is a libertarian. Based upon his statements in that book, it appears that he was a libertarian even before there was a Libertarian Party.

Here are the reviews:

It’s all about lawmaking!,

February 25, 2008
By Goodrich (Dearborn, MI USA) – See all my reviews

Those who still want Mike Gravel’s original Citizen Power, but can’t afford to pay over $200 for the few rare copies that are available, will be pleased with the new Citizen Power: A Mandate for Change. In some chapters, Senator Gravel has incorporated substantial excerpts from his original book and then updated his thoughts on each issue, often admitting that his position on a certain issue in the 1970s was naive and that he now views that issue with a mature mind. This is a refreshingly candid look at a presidential candidate’s positions on key issues facing the American people today. Most importantly, however, is Chapter 2 and supplemental appendices about the National Initiative, which Senator Gravel and some of the nation’s top constitutional scholars crafted to empower citizens as lawmakers; after all, lawmaking is the cornerstone of democracy. All subsequent chapters address how the National Initiative for Democracy (NI4D)would work to alleviate problems, such as healthcare and education.

From ending the war on drugs to restructuring the UN,

March 8, 2008

Senator Gravel has produced an engaging book! He presents complex and difficult issues facing the US and the world in understandable prose and proposes solutions that call for transformational change. In response to a legislative process controlled by corporations and special interests Gravel proposes the National Initiative on Democracy that would empower the people to legislate through direct democracy in national referendums on issues. In response to ineffective global governance Gravel calls for a restructuring of the UN including an end to veto powers for the permanent members of the Security Council. I was delighted to see his position on American exceptionalism. Granted that we are #1 in the world in the numbers of people in our prisons, on many key measures such as education, healthcare we are far from being the best in the world. I was most pleased by the optimism of Mike Gravel’s vision for the future of America in the world. He sees solutions to problems such as global warming, energy, and national security through greater cooperation with other countries. The beginning of his space policy statement on page 59 is particularly encouraging: “SPACE REPRESENTS A LIMITLESS FRONTIER for humankind. Laws modeled on the Law of the Sea need to be agreed upon to make energy, natural resources, and knowledge available in a manner that fosters greater cooperation, rather than greater competition, among all nations. In keeping with this spirit, space must not be militarized.”

Gravel’s Populist Manifesto,

March 19, 2008
By D. Douglas (California) – See all my reviews
(REAL NAME)

An eloquent and lucid political manifesto by an increasingly refreshing, honest and prudent politician.
Citizen Power showcases a myriad of power-to-the-people proposals, and sways from your politics as usual demagoguery, while Gravel’s prose is filled with solemnity and earnestness, contrary to his political opponents.
The book’s motif is the National Initiative for Democracy, a populist program that will enable ordinary citizens to become legislatures, moreover eliminating large bureaucracies and big government lapdogs.
An emphasis is brought upon the military-industrial complex and its draconian, unproductive results. Suggesting the ultimate disintegration of the latter, if not grave consequences will ensue
Gravel’s proposals on education is most interesting, and offer an ingenious subsidiary, if utilized in orthodoxy, to our failing educational system.
The War on Drugs chapter was dismaying at least, and produced a sharp contempt for the activities our government continues to perpetuate.

I have probably forgotten important topics of this book, and my review is ultimately asymmetrical and lackluster. I can only recommend this fine book, so you can make your own judgments and discoveries.

Senator Gravel was kind enough to state that, if any of our readers have additional questions, I can phone him again to get those answers. Therefore, if you have any questions which aren’t answered here, post them and in about a week I will give him another call to get your answers for you.

Project Vote Smart

In Barack Obama, Christine Smith, Congress, Democrats, George Phillies, Libertarian, Libertarian Party-US, Politics, Republican on February 14, 2008 at 8:02 am

Project Vote SmartI just ran across a website called “Project Vote Smart“. This site gathers information from various candidates for office, so you can view it all in one place, and even very easily compare the candidates if you open them up in side-by-side tabs on your browser.

It is very interesting to see the “political courage test”, which pins the candidates down on the issues. Unfortunately, it appears that most mainstream candidates (including all of the presidential frontrunners from both major parties, and including Ron Paul) have refused to complete the quiz portion. However, Barack Obama did complete the questionnaire when he was running for the Senate, which gives a good insight into how he views the issues; while Hillary Clinton and Ron Paul both refused to complete it even when they were running for Congress. There is no older questionnaire information for any of the other frontrunners.

I think it’s obvious why candidates wouldn’t want to complete it, since it can later easily be used against them. Accordingly, I think any candidate which refuses to answer those questions should be viewed with suspicion.

Some third party presidential candidates did complete the “courage test” though, including libertarians. I was quite surprised to see that I disagree with some libertarian candidates on a few issues I thought we’d agree upon. For example, I was extremely surprised to see that neither Phillies nor Kubby have chosen to eliminate inheritance taxes (Phillies wants to slightly decrease them, while Kubby wants to greatly decrease them). Yet why should the government get any of it, since it’s a gift from one person to another? Christine Smith is the only libertarian candidate to propose eliminating that tax.

On the other hand, Kubby wants to greatly decrease gasoline taxes and certain “sin” taxes (alcohol, cigarettes, etc) while Phillies and Smith want to eliminate those taxes altogether. On those tax issues, I agree with Phillies. I would agree with Smith, but she wants to eliminate ALL federal taxes (including income taxes); and while that’s an idea I’d love to get behind, I don’t think it is realistic, at least not at this time.

I will have to study the candidates’ responses a lot more closely, and I strongly suggest others do the same. While it won’t help much with regard to mainstream candidates who have refused to answer the questionnaire (and personally, I hold that against them because it is to my mind proof that they plan to say one thing to get elected, and do another once they are in office), it does give quite a bit of insight into third party presidential candidates.

Originally posted on Adventures in Frickintardistan

UPDATE:  I received the following comment from Tom Knapp, Steve Kubby’s Communications Director:

I worked with Steve on filling out the Political Courage Test, and “eliminate” was not offered as an option on the document we got from VoteSmart. I sent them an email when I saw that it appeared on other candidates’ answers, but haven’t ever heard back from them.

Without going over the PCT line by line, I can’t say offhand that EVERY “greatly decrease” would actually have been “eliminate” had that option been visible, the inheritance tax would absolutely have been an “eliminate” item.

Thanks for that info, Tom!

Controversial overdose rescue kit saves lives

In Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), Health, Personal Responsibility on January 26, 2008 at 8:52 pm

Opiate effect on brainRichard Knox, NPR “All Things Considered” 02 January 08:

Every year, overdoses of heroin and opiates, such as Oxycontin, kill more drug users than AIDS, hepatitis or homicide.

And the number of overdoses has gone up dramatically over the past decade.

But now, public health workers from New York to Los Angeles, North Carolina to New Mexico, are preventing thousands of deaths by giving $9.50 rescue kits to drug users. The kits turn drug users into first responders by giving them the tools to save a life.

One of the new rescue operations is located off a side street behind St. Peter’s Episcopal Church in Cambridge, Mass. Clients enter through an innocuous-looking door and climb a flight of wooden stairs to the Cambridge Cares About AIDS program for harm reduction.

The group says its mission is to provide prevention, education, advocacy and support services to the economically and socially disadvantaged.

At CCAA, drug users can obtain condoms, sterile needles, syringes and other resources to reduce their vulnerability to disease and death. Health educators also cajole their clients to undergo HIV and hepatitis testing, urge them not to share needles, and find them slots in detoxification programs and methadone treatment.

Drug Used as a Nasal Spray

On one recent wintry morning, health educator Eliza Wheeler teaches a 34-year-old client named Elissa how to rescue her friends from a fatal overdose.

“All right, Elissa,” Wheeler says in a getting-down-to-business manner. “The first thing I’m going to do is ask a series of questions about your current drug use. So, we’re going to talk about just the last 30 days.”

Elissa has been on methadone for six years, but she confesses that she used heroin a couple of days in the previous month because she was under a lot of stress.

Like most long-term heroin users, Elissa has had scary experiences with overdoses – her own and others’. Once, her partner became unresponsive after taking a mixture of heroin, benzodiazepine pills and alcohol, she says.

“He was not breathing, which is why I called the ambulance,” she says. “But I managed to wake him up before they came, and they didn’t take him away. He went out and convinced them he was OK.”

Many times, drug users and their friends don’t call 911, which is why overdoses are so often fatal. They’re afraid the police might come, and they could get arrested — or lose their housing or custody of their children.

Signs of Overdose

Wheeler runs through the signs of heroin overdose for Elissa.

“There are some clear signs, like people turning blue,” Wheeler says. “Sometimes, there’s like a gurgling sound and nonresponsiveness, of course. And there are some less clear signs, like people being in kind of a heavy nod — kind of being really sedated — not breathing very often. We usually say 12 breaths a minute is key. So, if people are breathing less than that, it’s time to really be concerned.”

Wheeler says stimulation — rubbing hard on the breastbone or the upper lip — can sometimes bring an overdose victim back to consciousness. If that doesn’t work, call 911 and start blowing air into the person’s lungs, a modified form of CPR called “rescue breathing.”

That’s when it’s time to open up the overdose rescue kit, Wheeler says, ripping open a plastic bag and taking out a small box containing a vial of medicine.

“This is what the box looks like,” she says. “Attached to the box is a little apparatus that makes it into a spray. It’s just a nasal spray. There’s no injection.”

“That’s so wonderful!” Elissa says, looking visibly relieved. “I had thought it was a shot.”

The nasal spray is a drug called naloxone, or Narcan. It blocks the brain receptors that heroin activates, instantly reversing an overdose.

Doctors and emergency medical technicians have used Narcan for years in hospitals and ambulances. But it doesn’t require much training because it’s impossible to overdose on Narcan.

The Cambridge program began putting Narcan kits into drug users’ hands in August. Since then, the kits have been used to reverse seven overdoses.

New data compiled for NPR by researcher Alex Kral of the consulting firm RTI International show that more than 2,600 overdoses have been reversed in 16 programs operating across the nation.

Kral estimates that is at least 75 percent of all the reversals that have occurred so far among several dozen U.S. programs, many of which are new.

John Gatto, executive director of the Cambridge program, says such dramatic results are unusual in the world of substance abuse treatment and prevention.

“In the work that we do, oftentimes the results are very intangible,” Gatto says. “This is amazing to be involved in something that literally can save people’s lives. Why wouldn’t we do it?”

Program Has Critics

But Dr. Bertha Madras, deputy director of the White House Office on National Drug Control Policy, opposes the use of Narcan in overdose-rescue programs.

“First of all, I don’t agree with giving an opioid antidote to non-medical professionals. That’s No. 1,” she says. “I just don’t think that’s good public health policy.”

Madras says drug users aren’t likely to be competent to deal with an overdose emergency. More importantly, she says, Narcan kits may actually encourage drug abusers to keep using heroin because they know overdosing isn’t as likely.

Madras says the rescue programs might take away the drug user’s motivation to get into detoxification and drug treatment.

“Sometimes having an overdose, being in an emergency room, having that contact with a health care professional is enough to make a person snap into the reality of the situation and snap into having someone give them services,” Madras says.

Study Confirms Benefits

There is not much research on the effect of Narcan kits on drug abusers’ behavior, but one small study suggests that overdose-rescue programs reduce heroin use and get some people into treatment.

Karen Seal, an author of the study, says the study showed rescue programs have a tremendous impact.

“It was one of those great studies where we just all walked away and said, ‘Whoa! This is terrific!’” says Seal, of the University of California, San Francisco. “I mean, by our sheer interaction with these folks around these life-saving behaviors, we’re actually creating some real positive change here.”

And health educator Wheeler says putting overdose-rescue kits in the hands of drug users sends them a positive message.

“There is a real potential culture change among drug users because of Narcan,” she says. “Because, from my experience, I feel like drug users internalize a lot of stigma that’s out in the world about them. They come to believe that dying is just part of this life that they’ve chosen.”

Wheeler says it doesn’t have to be that way.

Despite the rescue program’s critics, it has not generated the kind of controversy that surrounded needle-exchange programs. Those programs seek to prevent drug users from getting HIV or hepatitis by sharing dirty needles and syringes.

So far, Narcan rescue programs have sprung up in big cities and rural areas around the country with little or no opposition.

Missouri wants to outlaw cussing in bars

In Big Brother, Civil Liberties, Constitutional Rights, Entertainment, Law, Local Politics, Music, Nanny State on January 17, 2008 at 12:03 am

International Loud Cussing SymposiumIn St. Charles, Missouri, officials are considering a bill which would ban profanity, table dancing, drinking contests, and any other type of indecent, profane or obscene music, literature, and entertainment in bars. They claim the law is needed to keep rowdy bar crowds in the historic downtown district under control.

They don’t seem to care that the behavior they find so reprehensible is taking place on private property. They also seem to be overlooking the undeniable fact that it’s none of their fucking business what anybody does on private property, as long as the property owner doesn’t mind.

If people in that area aren’t careful, they’ll ban consuming alcohol in bars next.

Bar owners, needless to say, are opposed to the measure, saying it is a violation of their civil rights. Marc Rousseau, who owns a bar called R.T. Weilers, said, “We’re dealing with adults here once again and I don’t think it’s the city’s job or the government’s job to determine what we can and cannot play in our restaurant.”

Rousseau is absolutely correct.

St. Charles officials are obviously trying to take all the fun out of going to a bar. I’m not a big drinker at all, and while I did hit the bars regularly when I was young, I now only drink occasionally. However, the last time I went to a bar (on New Year’s Eve) people were hootin’ and hollerin’ and drinkin’ and cussin’, and a good time was had by all. I really don’t see what the problem is, except that city leaders seem to have an overly tight anal sphincter. What they really need is a good stiff drink to loosen that up.

There is no doubt that the proposed measure won’t withstand court scrutiny due to being overly broad and therefore not enforceable (not to mention being a violation of bar patrons’ and bar owners’ constitutional rights), but city officials don’t seem to mind that bar owners will be forced to spend money unnecessarily to challenge the law. Outrageous.

__________________________

Source: AP: Bill would ban swearing in bars

Originally posted by ElfNinosMom on Adventures in Frickintardistan