Medical Marijuana May Prevent Obesity, Diabetes

A new study published by the America Journal of Medicine claims to show a link between cannibus use and lower "fasting insulin" levels, which could mean a lesser likelihood of developing diabetes and obesity in general.

Here's a link to the article, which unfortunately is in PDF format.

Let's not be too hasty, as cannibus has only recently been available for study and we can expect a lot of new data in the years ahead. But with treatments for cancer at least having anecdotal success, the unintended consequences might be in our favor for once.

The intended consequences, namely ending The Prohibition, are still to be remedied...

The Last Closet to Open

From io9 comes a call for a new civil rights battle:

What I am trying to accomplish is multifold,” he told Merica. “I consider myself working on the next civil equality movement, just like women’s rights, LGBT rights and African-American Civil Rights. We are still in the early stages of eliminating discrimination against atheists and humanists. That is something I really want to accomplish.

More on atheism later when events merit a discussion...

Defining Metafederalism: Libertarians and NASA

Kahlesste kaase, motherfucker!

In libertarian circles I often see an uncharacteristic affinity for one government program in particular, an affinity which I too hold. That program is NASA, and I think it has a place in the world where people start making sense on issues of individual liberty and limited government.

Yes NASA, the American space program that, despite being a terribly inefficient and to some an unnecessary organization, has yielded some serious pioneering in both real space and scientific discovery.

But in the era of private space ports and the end of the shuttle program, many have questioned the viability of the space agency.

As I have stated, libertarians are not anarchists; the government has some role to fill. Two future roles for NASA are, in my view, completely consistent with libertarian philosophy.

First of all, there exists things like this:

On May 31, an asteroid as big as nine cruise ships will sail past Earth. There is no cause for concern, however, as the asteroid is expected to miss the Earth by approximately 3.6 million miles, which is about 15 times the distance between Earth and the moon.

The government has the right, or more specifically, the duty to defend its citizens. And I consider defending humanity from an apocalyptic strike from Near Earth Objects, or NEOs, fits well within the definition of defense.

We have had two rather scary near misses over the last year, and one hopes NASA can work with the burgeoning private space industry to combat this problem. We can quibble over unfair government contract assignment of the anti-asteroid batteries once they are in place.

Secondly, someone will have to step in to play traffic cop if the future does hold for humanity the ascent from our home world. It may sound like sci-fi, but someone is going to have to manage trade regulations* and traffic routing and what not. (As you may have noticed, I am not convinced of the practical applications of the old private road saw of the more extreme wing).

So there. Not exactly a libertarian view in the strictest sense, but fitting of this term metafederalism, that is, moving beyond that which is unattainable in order to effect real libertarian change. Public roads are not going anywhere soon, but with outer space, the sky is no longer the limit...

*As I mentioned, regulations will always exist in some form for markets, at minimum in order to prosecute fraud, etc. I feel libertarians realize this, and want both limited and even application of the least amount of regulation possible.

For More Information, Here is the NASA NEO website.

Obama To Appoint Yet Another Former Bushy

Just in case you had any lingering doubts about the lack of substantive difference between the two largest parties, allow me to pass along this from the New York Times:

President Obama plans to nominate James B. Comey, a former hedge fund executive who served as a senior Justice Department official under President George W. Bush, to replace Robert S. Mueller III as the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, according to two people with knowledge of the selection.

Someone is going to have to explain how a former hedge fund manager is going to be qualified to run the FBI, unless of course this is yet another example of the revolving door of Washington.

So the guy made some political stunt during the Bush II years. He still went along with the whole wiretapping affair after some adjustments were made. But to imply he thwarted some illegal program (which went ahead anyhow) in the name of altruism is outright silly.

Comey is just another reboot in the new Millennial America, where everyone pretends to be on either side of the same coin, flipped in full display of the public and with a politically-blinding glimmer.

Clinton Barely Edges Paul in Iowa Poll

Joe Wolverton at The New American takes a look into the Rand Paul camp:

During a visit to Kentucky, Paul told reporters that his decision to seek a second term in the Senate was certain, adding that any decision on a presidential run would “come later.” Paul echoed these remarks in an interview with The New American, saying that the call on his presidential candidacy wouldn’t come before 2014.

(...) 

A new Quinnipiac poll shows Clinton leading Iowa voters by a narrow 46-42 percent margin.

I'm pretty sure this is the best I've seen a libertarian-leaning candidate perform in my lifetime. The best part:

Presidential aspirations aside, Rand Paul is bolstering his libertarian bona fides by blocking every effort by his colleagues in Congress to deprive Americans of their most basic civil rights as protected by the Constitution.

I really hope he keeps this up...

Correction 5.28.2013: Wow, that's bad. The headline originally read "Paul over Clinton in Iowa Poll“ and the permalink will remain so as a testament to my blunder.

Unintended Consequences of DooGooderism

Tommy Chong of Cheech and Chong fame turned 75 years old last week, and has been fighting cancer for about a year.

His weapon? Medical Marijuana, which he claimed recently has helped him beat the disease altogether. From Zoe Mintz at the IBT:

“That's right, I kicked cancer's ass! So the magic plant does cure cancer with the right diet and supplements,” Chong wrote. 

Chong was diagnosed with prostate cancer last June. According to his post, Chong said he was recommended an intense treatment in Mexico, which cost $25,000. He sought an alternative and found a Canadian doctor who recommended a different diet and “hash oil.”

Obviously anecdotal examples can't replace actual science, but now that the belt of prohibition is loosening a little, one hopes we can actually begin studying what benefits Medical MJ can bring to the medical field.

One result of The Prohibition has been the suppression of research on this substance.

With open study (that is, study where those involved do not need to fear incarceration), perhaps we can design forms of the plant that would have less harmful side effects for patients.

But all that hinges on open discussion, an enemy of the War on Drugs and of liberty-crushing policies in general. I beg this discussion begin before too many lives are lost to the whims of superstition or traditionally-held yet scientifically-wrong beliefs.

Defining Metafederalism: The Libertarian Welfare State

One of the hardest parts of libertarianism to digest, for many, is our alleged lack of compassion for the poor or suffering or both. The byproduct of advocating for greater personal liberty and personal responsibility is that one may appear callous toward those who are in genuine need of help.

And indeed, some libertarians arguments range from calling the USA's current safety net system (or welfare state or dole or whatever is the term de jour) unnecessary to declaring it unconstitutional. And in principle, I agree. One shouldn't be forced to support another's unproductive lifestyle.

But there's a huge difference between supporting a lifestyle and lending a hand. And therefore I propose a compromise to the libertarian world:

Why the Tax Code Sucks: Part II

Kentucky Senator and mostly libertarian Rand Paul on why the tax code causes more problems than it fixes:

It's nice to see public figures making the practical arguments not unlike those MF publishes. If you missed the point, Paul was saying that too high a tax rate causes people to not want to pay it. Are raising taxes really the solution?

Both Parties Blow and Other Links

Not much time to write this week, so...

Libertarian "Activist" Arrested for Public Toking and his behavior during this doesn't mesh well with realistic policy reform.

Rand Paul representing Libertarians here and here. Now that you're the media's face of libertarianism, we need to get a few things straight...

Now that we can take one's property and give it to another private entity, I guess reporters don't even bother questioning Eminent Domain. At least the readers smell a rat.

More prison guards and more unions here and here.

Welcome to the USA, 2013.

Capitalism vs. Fraud: Part I

Since this site is to small to afford a lawyer, I'll just share what William Alden of the The New York Times wrote:

...Herbalife, which sells nutritional supplements through a network of distributors, was already under considerable scrutiny. The hedge fund manager William A. Ackman claimed late last year that the company was an illegal pyramid scheme...

The linked story is itself the problem. At what point did business writers start treating multi-level marketing operations as legitimate businesses?

Capitalism and the Free Market are given a bad reputation by ethically questionable "companies" like these, and make easy targets for regulation arguments too.

Let me be clear on a principle: fraud is not capitalism. I'm not accusing anyone of committing fraud, I'm simply stating that libertarianism and enforcement of theft laws are fully compatible.

Libertarians do not condone violence (and theft is a form of violence against property), and this view remains consistent for individuals, small companies, or massive banks via humongous tax-funded bailouts.

We don't need new regulations, but merely enforcement of our laws. Also, for fun, here's the Penn & Teller: Bullshit! episode about the matter:



UPDATE: Pyramid Scheme Alert is good resource for checking out potential "opportunities."

Republican Big Government

With the ongoing troubles for President Obama over his administration's Nixonian policies, MF has been covering the left's abuses. So as not to be confused with your typical Obama-bashing blog, I'd like to take a minute to point out that Republicans can no longer waive the banner of small government.

We bash everyone here.

I use the term Republican because "conservative" no longer applies. We libertarians are the true conservatives, the sole standard-bearers of small government and social sensibilities.

The same people who champion 2nd Amendment rights as a safeguard against tyranny facilitate this tyranny from the local level to the highest court in the land.

Ideas like declaring an official religion are literally Medieval and the very definition of abuse of individual rights by an overreaching government. And while both sides of the traditional spectrum are at fault for the disastrous War on Drugs, it is the Republican core's big-government, uh, elephant in the proverbial room.

As I mentioned before, a real conservative would look to conserve our fighting men and women, not throw them into war after bloody war overseas for the enrichment of their defense contractor pals.

Image from CNN.com

Rand Paul's recent rightward reversal from his previously-federalist views show how little regard for personal liberty the aging, unchanging and powerful GOP truly has.

Paul's big breakthrough in popularity came with his much-stories filibuster about drones, yet once the tentacles of the GOP establishment take hold, such principled and logical positions must be abandoned for the sake of power.

This desire for power, over all other corrupting agents, is the acid that erodes the steel pillars of principal in our legislators.

Strong opposition to statism in the future relies on a strong foundation in small government principles, and if we the people take back some of this power, it's corrosive effect can be effectively minimalized.

Attempts to control campaign finances are futile, as money always finds its way to power. It is the power that must be regulated because it is the power from which all corruption derives.

The degeneration of the GOP over the last few decades is a case study. It is now up to libertarianism to carry on the battle to protect individual liberty both personally and professionally.

The Future of War

It will be on the internet (via WSJ):

The Financial Times said its Tech Blog and various Twitter accounts were hacked on Friday by a group identifying itself as the Syrian Electronic Army. 

(...) 

Seconds before the note was published, two messages populated the newspaper's Twitter feed, including one stating "Syrian Electronic Army Was Here," and another including a link to a YouTube video of several bound and blindfolded individuals who appeared to be shown being executed. Both messages were quickly removed.

Has our massive military apparatus made us to inflexible to the changing modern world? Not unlike France and it's WWI hubris, circa 1940, are we preparing for the last war rather than the next?

My practical call for a saner military here.

What seem like pranks may be test runs for serious attacks, and since our infrastructure is largely dependent on electronics and consumer internet attacks might create real world panic, we need to pay better attention to this rather than using our military as a revenue source for Germany or Japan.

2016 Watch and Other Links

And until the campaign season begins in earnest, some links:

Rand Paul Runs Right

Hannity Claims Libertarian Leanings: Can someone tell Hannity that libertarian does not mean "cover term for something I'm liberal about but can't say publicly for fear of losing my show."

PolicyMic's Pundit of the Week was not Swathi Nallapa...

At Least One Libertarian Won Something For Once

Libertarians Are Still Employable

One More Nail for Prohibition

Libertarian Pol Don DeZarn (Image credit: NJ.com)

A New Jersey Libertarian running for that state's senate publicly smoked pot in public. It's good to see people taking a stand, even if there was no risk of getting arrested as the story from NJ.com/The Times said.

Is this really the best picture they could find for the cover?

Or next time, dude, could you bring some Visine?

He's actually somewhat lucky he didn't get arrested, since 86.5 people are arrested on marijuana charges every hour in the U.S. according the chart at the bottom and it's data (which can be found by following the image's link).

Because of this high arrest rate and the heavy consequences paired in some states with a possession charge, the traditional civil disobedience component of getting arrested in the act might not bring the desired attention to the issue.

It's somewhat hard, after all, to stand out in an annual crowd of over 750,000 arrested for a plant each year.



UPDATE: Russian Bears Get Wasted Too

UPDATE 2: According to Reason, Jimmy Carter (now a private citizen since the Constitution explicitly prohibits titles of nobility such as "former President") stated his desire to continue The Prohibition. Carter said:

"We have to prevent making marijuana smoking from becoming attractive to young people, which is, I'm sure, what the producers of marijuana....are going to try and do."

As are probably the producers of movies, music, television, video games, and toasted pastries. But nothing makes access to marijuana for kids easy like keeping it illegal, since drug dealers tend not to check IDs...

Defining Metafederalism: Non-Aggression

One position we share with only the leftmost wing of the left is that of opposition to aggressive war. We used to share this with the rest of America but the definition of a defensive war has become so muddled since 9-11-2001.

Opposition to war should not be confused with opposition to having a strong military. To the contrary, a strong military is a major deterrent against the outbreak of war.

"Defense" Hawks often portray the anti-war movement as being in some way emotionally opposed to war, and the image of a 60's era hippie comes to kind, that is, without any practical reasoning.

Perhaps the anti-war left does feel that way, but libertarians claim logic and ethics as allies in the struggle to end this unending war.

I'm 30 years old as I type this. By 2014, and counting Iraq 1 and maybe Kosovo, I will have spent more years of my life in a country at war than years in times of peace.

Democratic Wars and Republican Wars and justified wars and illegal wars and distraction wars and wars begun by gunslingers and Nobel Peace Prize winners alike.

It's enough already.

Obama's War on Transparency: Part II

...and he's beginning to lose one battle. From the L.A. Times:

WASHINGTON – President Obama announced the resignation Wednesday evening of Steven Miller, acting commissioner of the embattled Internal Revenue Service, a move the president said was essential to restore the public’s faith following revelations that the agency inappropriately singled out conservative groups for special scrutiny.

But here's the important part:

He became aware that there were potential problems in the way the IRS was handling applications more than a year ago, an inspector general’s report said this week. In late March 2012, amid media stories that tea party groups were having difficulty getting their applications approved, he asked one of his managers to find out what was going on and make recommendations. 

On May 3, 2012, Miller learned that the agency had improperly singled out groups by name for additional examination of their applications for tax-exempt status, the IRS said this week. 

But six weeks later, in a letter to the chairman of a key House oversight subcommittee, Miller made no mention of the problems and wrote that after an increase in applications for tax-exempt status in 2010, the agency "took steps to coordinate the handling of the cases to ensure consistency."

So he had the inkling, and later evidence, that the IRS was targeting a certain segment of the public for increased tax scrutiny, which can effectively hamper participation in our Republic (whether one agrees with their views or not). And all this before the last election began in earnest?

Benghazi was a red-herring and making serious opposition to the current administration look silly.

The actions of the IRS are just plain wrong.

Obama's War on Transparency

When he was elected, Obama talked about bringing transparency to government. That was the high-water mark for this issue.

Since talking a good game, the president has acted to make the conduct of our government more opaque than at any time in our history. From fewer Freedom Of Information Act requests being granted, to the promised honesty of the White House website which is now a mere propaganda arm, to his crackdown on whistleblowers (More links to this and much more on Politico here).

And the Julian Assange/Bradley Manning affair is worthy of it's own post.

Now the news breaks today that his Justice Department was secretly collecting evidence on American journalists. In America. Seriously, Eric Holder just defended it too.

Get ready to watch Democratic pundits twist logic into a Gordian Knot defending Obama.

While in no way do I defend Richard Nixon, I think his crime was less severe. Nixon violated laws, Obama is violating amendments...

Great Scott, Flying Cars Arrive

Photo Source: news.discovery.com

It's about time we get flying cars, now give us the moving sidewalks we were promised and we're square.

Now we just need some way to power the buggers. Do remember that these plug-in hybrids are recharged from a carbon heavy supply.

Why the Tax Code Sucks

I see people bat around estimates of the number of pages the US tax code contains, yet they never seem to say why such a large document is bad. After all, complicated answers aren't necessarily wrong answers.

Is a complicated tax system bad because it's a pain in the ass to do taxes? Yes, but not a good enough reason to scrap it. Life is a pain sometimes.

But when the complicated system is used to favor influential political donors or, worse, silence opposition, as in the recent news that Tea Party groups were targeted by Obama's IRS, then, my liberty-loving friends, we have a problem.

A simple system of determining tax burden is needed because simple rules prevent the uneven and easily exploitable collection of revenue from being manipulated to target or exempt individual groups or industries.

If taxes on business profits were, for a completely random example, 10% for every company, the end, then there is no method by which one business could leverage political influence over another.

Lower taxes might be what everyone hears when a pundit pushes a flat tax, but it is justice in the collection of revenue that we seek here at MF, and is so sorely lacking in America today.

Without favoritism in the tax code, I contend* the Free Market would be in a far better position to police itself.

*My logic behind this will be saved for another post or posts, since it would be too long and too off-topic to lay out here.

Libertarian Ideas Kill and Other Unfacts

Over at PolicyMic, Swathi Nallapa claims libertarian ideas were in part to blame for the recent building collapse in Bangladesh. Writing on a website with an emphasis for decentralization, Nallapa ironically calls for greater central control in the form of global labor laws.

While I have no intention of arguing with a college student, her point is worth addressing because it's a common attack on libertarianism from the left that needs to be addressed.

Their basic point is that, in libertopia, without regulations on workplace conditions, employers will have no regard for the lives and welfare if their employees. All bosses, to them, were created by Charles Dickens.

And to this I say bah... and no, they're not.

For one, the building in Southeast Asia was already in violation of local laws. By proposing global regulation, is she suggesting the US or even the UN enforce these laws? This sounds a lot like the spreading democracy arguments we hear every time we invade another country.

If employers aren't following their own laws, why would they follow ours?

Secondly, they assume a dichotomy consisting of either government regulation or anarchy. There are other solutions besides regulation. Libertarians don't say "do nothing" but rather "we, the people, can do it better than a central power."

The time has come for libertarians to cleanse our mantle of the left's broad brush of unfair criticism and of the soiling left by the Wayne Allyn Root wing of the LP.

If we are to continue to grow in the national conversation, we must be sure to define ourselves apart from our opponents' characterizations, since they have most of the media for definition.

Seeking Bad Advice in Cleveland

The recent events in Cleveland are simply frightening. As detail after horrid detail come to light, one cannot imagine the emotion those involved are going through.

Yet it is that very emotion that some of the worst members of our society exploit for personal gain, and in the process giving capitalism a bad name.

Why the sign? They should foresee who will buy it, no?

The mother of one of the kidnapped, Louwana Miller, sought the help of a TV psychic in 2004, was blatantly lied to on the worst of topics, and likely lost some hope as a result.

She passed away two years later, and it's as yet unclear whether a broken heart contributed.

I post this because I don't suffer the supernatural. Humanity has scientific method and these old mystic rituals seldom stand up to the test.

Yet people keep pretending there's nothing wrong with forcing themselves to believe in things that have no basis in reality. This is shining example that faith is nothing more than a condition to be manipulated by the decided wrong people.

Wrong in predictions, like always, and wrong in business practice.

As I noted previously, critics of libertarians always accuse us of supporting an anarchy-based economy where things like fraud and deceptive practices are encouraged.

This is an unfair characterization designed to make us look like kooks. Very few, if any, libertarians believe theft is a virtue, we simply have different ideas for combating it -- ones that don't limit the liberty of others who aren't doing anything wrong.

But that is a topic for another day.

Just remember that a mother spent the final years of her life believing her daughter was dead because some con-artist, manipulating the controls built by religious indoctrination, was trying to make a quick, dishonest buck.

Now Taking Applications for Mars

Final boarding call 2022.

And to think, we might live in the era of interplanetary travel.

Setting a fine example of the Free Market producing better ideas, a private Dutch nonprofit is taking applications for a one-way trip to Mars.


No news on when the associated reality show, designed in part to fund the project, will air. Assuming this is serious, that is one clever way to fund spacetravel.

Filed Under E for Epic

In this case I mean epic literally.

Scientists may have discovered a lost sunken continent under the Atlantic Ocean. Here's some video:



Even if this isn't the legendary continent of Atlantis, it still shows just how little we really know about the world, and why science education is so important.

This Is Your Kids On Religion

I can only imagine how surprised I'd be if my daughter suddenly start spouting Creationism. But then again, these people in Greenville, SC signed up for it:

The Actual "Science" Quiz. From the snopes.com Link.

And here's the second page:

Dear Gun Control Advocates: Part II

As I mentioned in the previous post, the perhaps well-intentioned task of regulating firearms, aside from being highly questionable on Constitutional grounds, just got immeasurably more implausible.

People can now print guns and the implications for American firearm policy are huge.

Dear Gun Control Advocates...

...your argument is invalid.

Wired reports on the birth of the first 3-D printed handgun. Analysis to follow as this unfolds.

Updated: HERE

Defining Metafederalism: The Free Market

Often times during political discussion I see terms like "free market" and "capitalism" batted around in what seem, at least in my views, divorced from their proper contexts.

Therefore, I would like to look at such concepts as I define them, merely for the sake of clarity.

Let me begin by stating that a true Free Market's engine is competition. The thrill of victory and the ever-growing desire for power has fueled this competition since the beginning of time, and although not always well intentioned, self interest is a powerful resource.

The US Government's role should be to provide an environment that guarantees equal opportunity, within its prescribed powers, for the natural drive to compete and to thrive.

This view raises two points of contention I have with commonly held views by the left and right. I say that libertarianism has not a middle answer but a unique third solution to questions like:

1. What are the extent of government's prescribed powers to regulate the marketplace?

2. What is equal opportunity?

I am highly irked when the left attacks the "free market" using examples of some corporation's fraud or abuse. Crime is not capitalism.

The most basic libertarian idea is that people are free to exercise their liberties however they choose, as long as they do not infringe upon the rights and liberties of others. This principle is something upon which I feel most people agree — the practical application is where my disputes arise.

I hate be the one to tell you this, but liberty often times means letting others get away with pet peeves. I may think baggy pants are unfashionable, but I have no right to use force of law to tell other where their belt-line should lay.

But what happens is that unethical behavior (see: infringing on the rights of others) is used as a target for criticism, or worse defended as a necessary component, of capitalism. But fraud is not part of the free market, and prosecuting theft on any scale is well within the rights of the government.

What should be not be within the scope of the government's power?

Enforcing equal opportunity through subsidy and favoritism, or what is called corporatism, a term that has been brought back into use recently by figures like Ron Paul, et al.

Under the banner of creating opportunity, the government dangerously distorts the engine of competition by giving an undue advantage to some, which is a privilege vastly amplified by the centralization of power. This is something I think the Wayne Allyn Roots of the world don't quite understand.

It is this power from where all corruption derives, not the money which is so often the target of campaign finance reforms. The money is only the medium, and being a politician would be a far less profitable venture if the power were drawn back in scale.

But I digress. The point is that the government, by attempting to create equality, actually magnifies inequities. I will attempt to prove this claim in the pages that follow and as future events provide good examples.

It follows that the free market must be permitted to take its own strides and tumbles, not because we desire bad results, but because we lack the tools to adequately prevent bad results and the tools we have (i.e. the Government) can easily produce worse results, even with the best intentions.

Sadly this means that bad thing will happen to good people. Negative results must be allowed to teach their sour lessons, as this can accelerate positive change. And why does that positive change happen?

As the victorious rest on their laurels, the defeated must evolve to survive. This axiom has been true for all life on Earth, and is described as, you guessed it:

Competition.

When Excessive Faith Becomes Dangerous

Who would have thought that belief in an invisible, all-powerful being would lead to real world risks? According to a study released Wednesday,  May 1, those widely held views might have more widespread effects.

Researchers from the University of Pittsburgh, my alma mater, and the University of Colorado found that belief in Armageddon correlates with denial of climate change.

From The Raw Story:

The study, based on data from the 2007 Cooperative Congressional Election Study, uncovered that belief in the “Second Coming” of Jesus reduced the probability of strongly supporting government action on climate change by 12 percent when controlling for a number of demographic and cultural factors. When the effects of party affiliation, political ideology, and media distrust were removed from the analysis, the belief in the “Second Coming” increased this effect by almost 20 percent.

 I can understand why people would be concerned about greater environmental regulation*, as I too was skeptical for a long time with regard to Anthropogenic Global Warming. But there is simply too much evidence now, and to deny it is to deny reality.

And since reality denial and religious belief go hand in stigmata'd hand, one can see why this correlation may have a common cause.

*EDIT: I only mention government regulation as a reason to be skeptical, not as a solution to the problem. The science with regard to that question is currently unclear...

Even Fox News Can't Deny This

Via NORML, a poll released yesterday by Fox News reports that 85% of the country favors legalizing medical marijuana. From the release:

According to the poll, 85 percent of voters agree that adults ought to be allowed to use cannabis for therapeutic purposes if a physician authorizes it. The total marked an increase in support of four percent since Fox last polled the question in 2010 and is the highest level of public support for the issue ever reported in a scientific poll.

Looking in to the numbers, the poll finds that 80% of Republican respondents agreed that doctors should be able to prescribe medicine, and one hopes this is a sign that GOP voters are finally seeing the smoke of the legalization fire lit in Colorado and Washington this past election.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, between calling the War on Drugs a failure and recently signing a Good Samaritan law (in the presence of Jon Bon Jovi no less), appears to be leading the way toward a more sane stance for the conservative world.

Not that liberals aren't trying too, but actual support from the both sides of the aisle would be required to pass constructive reform on this issue in our current political environment, and support from the left has been decidedly lukewarm in the past.

Even the people of my backwards, treatment-industry-driven state are finally coming around. For Fox News to allow such a strong disagreement with its creed to slip through it's editorial fingers surely heralds the change ahead.

We have been pursuing a racist, massively destructive, and nearly-obsolete policy for the last 70 years. The people know it. The powerful need to take notice...

Fireball with a Brisk Jog Chaser

With today's news that aerobic exercise may de-pickle your noodle, may I suggest a few new ideas for the crocked competitor.

Someone Said It Better

"Power, for the sake of lording it over fellow-creatures or adding to personal pomp, is rightly judged base." - Sir Winston Churchill