Kucinich is only one to see the need to free the weed

[Virgil]

There are plenty of people that know that Kucinich is the only person that even speaks to the issue of the failure of the WOD and calls for regulating cannabis like alcohol and tobacco. Here is his position on ending the insanity of criminalizing the use of laughing grass. From http://www.pot-tv.net/archive/shows/pottvshowse-2403.html

Here is Kucinich's platform on marijuana.

With the enactment of the Volstead Act in 1919, America embarked on a social experiment known as Prohibition. Prohibitionists rejected the idea that people could be trusted to drink in moderation, arguing that alcohol use inevitably led to moral corruption and undesirable behavior. Accepting these premises led Congress to conclude that a federal ban on the production and sale of alcohol would go a long way toward reducing crime, and addressing a variety of other social problems. Within a decade, however, Americans discovered that the criminally-enforced prohibition of alcohol produced harmful side effects. The rise of black markets empowered organized crime to an unprecedented degree. In some of America’s largest cities, local governments had been heavily corrupted by the influence of organized crime. The black market provided minors with easy access to bootlegged alcohol, which was frequently of poor quality and unsafe to drink. Faced with the disastrous consequences of Prohibition, Congress decided in 1933 to repeal the Volstead Act. Since that time, the government has implemented the much more successful policy of focusing law-enforcement efforts on irresponsible alcohol users who endanger the rights of others.

Unfortunately, current drug policy fails to take into account the lessons of Prohibition. The law regards all users as abusers, and the result has been the creation of an unnecessary class of lawbreakers. According to the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report, more than 734,000 individuals were arrested on marijuana charges in 2000. This number far exceeds the total number of arrestees for all violent crimes combined, including murder, rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Eighty-eight percent of those arrested were charged with possession only. Convicted marijuana offenders are denied federal financial student aid, welfare, and food stamps, and may be removed from public housing. In many cases, those convicted are automatically stripped of their driving privileges, even if the offense is not driving related. In several states, marijuana offenders may receive maximum sentences of life in prison. The cost to the taxpayer of enforcing marijuana prohibition is staggering—over $10 billion annually.

The harsh nature of punishments for marijuana offenses is even more disturbing if one considers the racial bias of the war on drugs. According to data collected by the National Household Survey, on an annual basis the overall difference between drug use by blacks and whites is quite narrow. However, a recent national study found that African-Americans are arrested for marijuana offenses at higher rates than whites in 90% of 700 U.S. counties investigated. In 64% of these counties, the African-American arrest rate for marijuana violations was more than twice the arrest rate for whites. Questions of racial bias affect the integrity of investigations, arrests, and prosecutorial discretion. If we truly aspire to the ideal of “Justice for All,” then these unjust racial disparities are unacceptable outcomes for the American justice system.

The rationale for continuing this draconian policy of marijuana prohibition is unclear. Statistical evidence shows that marijuana use follows a pattern very similar to that of alcohol. Most marijuana users do so responsibly, in a safe, recreational context. These people lead normal, productive lives—pursuing careers, raising families, and participating in civic life. In addition, marijuana has proven benefits in the treatment of numerous diseases, such as providing a valuable means of pain management for terminally ill patients. In either of these contexts, there is no rational justification for criminally enforced prohibitions. These unnecessary arrests and incarcerations serve only to crowd prisons, backlog the judicial system, and distract law enforcement officials from pursuing terrorists and other violent criminals.

New Mexico’s 2001 state-commissioned Drug Policy Advisory Group determined that marijuana decriminalization “will result in greater availability of resources to respond to more serious crimes without any increased risks to public safety.” This finding is backed by the successful implementation of such policies in twelve states. The state governments of Alaska, California, Colorado, Maine, Minnesota, Mississippi, Nebraska, Nevada, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, and Oregon approved these measures after the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse recommended that Congress adopt a national policy of marijuana decriminalization. A recent CNN/Time magazine poll indicates overwhelming public support for this approach, with 72% of Americans favoring fines as a maximum penalty for minor marijuana offenses, and 80% approving of marijuana used for medical purposes.

A Kucinich administration would work to implement a drug policy that removes responsible recreational users and medical users of marijuana from the criminal justice system, in order to redirect resources toward the following goals:

Enforce penalties for those who provide marijuana to minors.


Enforce penalties for those who endanger the rights of others through irresponsible use, such as driving under the influence.


Develop drug treatment programs focused on rehabilitation, rather than incarceration.


Support the efforts of state governments in developing innovative approaches to drug policy.


Improve drug education by emphasizing science over scare tactics.


Implement a Department of Justice program that would review the records of, and consider for sentence reduction or release, inmates convicted for non-violent marijuana offenses.

[Mairead]

1. Absolutely everyone who believes in personal freedom should support him

This is not only the only pro-sanity policy, it's the only pro-responsibility and pro-freedom policy. Everyone should be standing with DK on this.

DK is the first candidate for president in my memory not to want to treat us as though we were all children!

Alice Duer Miller (1878-1942) was a strong feminist and suffragist whose poetry might have been written by Dorothy Parker--they had the same biting wit. The words she gives the Statue in her 'Unauthorised Interview Between the Suffragists and the Statue of Liberty' describe the attitudes of most politicians beautifully:

I am that Liberty, which when men win
They think that others' seeking is a sin;
I am that Liberty which men attain
And clip her wings lest she should fly again:
I am that Liberty which all your brothers
Think good for them and very bad for others.

And her 'Impressions of a Canvasser' will be recognised by everyone who's ever had to deal with a ruling class:


(Characters:
Suffragists, Half a dozen Legislators Opposed)

(Scene:
A Certain State Capitol)

Suffragists:
Please, sir, to tell us, if you will,
How you will vote upon our bill?

1st Legislator:
Ladies, observe my easy grace,
My manners and my pleasant face;
I hope you see I bow, I smile,
I call you “ladies”—all the while
My heart is black with seething hate
That I, who am so very great,
Should have to waste a single minute
On your affairs—there’s nothing in it.

Suffragists (to another legislator):
And you, sir, if we recollect,
Are much opposed. Is that correct?

2nd Legislator:
Opposed! O ladies, no, indeed!
I vote against you, I concede;
I may continue so to do,
But I am not opposed to you.
To call me so is most unjust.
I make myself quite plain, I trust.

Suffragists (to another legislator):
And may we hear from you, sir, how
You’ll vote?

3rd Legislator:
I have no option now;
I listen to my district’s voice;
It voted no; I have no choice.

Suffragists:
O sir, I think there’s some mistake,
Your district carried.

4th Legislator (hastily interrupting):
Let me make
His statement clear; he means that we
All come here absolutely free.
Not at our districts' beck and nod,
We vote to please ourselves and God;
And we are not in all events
The slaves of our constituents.

Suffragists (slightly puzzled, to another legislator):
And you, sir, shall you vote for it?

5th Legislator:
No, though I think you will admit
I have a very open mind;
If in my district I should find
The women want it (which they don’t)
I’d vote for it. Till then I won’t.

Suffragists:
And have you asked so very many?

5th Legislator (astonished):
Why, no, I don’t think I’ve asked any.

Suffragists (to another legislator):
And what, sir, is your attitude?

6th Legislator:
I hope you will not think me rude,
If, ladies, as a friend I say
You do not work the proper way.
It’s time you disappeared, and let
The public utterly forget
That there are women wish to vote.
Then at some future time, remote,
In twenty years, or twenty-five,
If you should chance to be alive,
You’d see a change—at least you ought—
A striking change in public thought.
This from a friend.

{That stanza reminds me of all the people here who try to tell us 'it's not Kucinich's time yet'}


Suffragists:
But are you so?

6th Legislator:
A friend? Oh, well, I voted "no,
But surely you can comprehend
That I advise you as a friend.

(Suffragists alone)

1st Suffragist:
The men in favour talk much less.

2nd Suffragist:
They haven’t much to say but “yes”;
The men opposed explain a lot
How they’re opposed and yet they’re not.
It takes some time to make that clear.

1st Suffragist:
How very bad the air is here!

2nd Suffragist:
Do you refer to ventilation,
Or to the general situation?

(The reply is inaudible.)

(Curtain)

[nightperson]

2. This thread title really cracked me up.

This is an old Republican article that I use to remind "conservatives" about how radical Ashcroft is-http://www.worldpolicy.org/globalrights/usa/1996-0212-NR-drugwar.html. When did everything go so horribly wrong? Here's a newer Republican article that slays Ashcroft-http://www.nationalreview.com/murdock/murdock030403.asp. I think many in both parties say "Free Tommy Chong!". It's an easy bi-partisan issue :hippie: :smoke: .

[goodhue]

3. Free Tommy Chong!

Indeed.
As always, I wonder whether DK is the only candidate who really gets it, or is he the only one with the courage to stick to the truth.
In any event, DK rocks and Tommy Chong is a political prisoner.

[nightperson]

5. Hmmm, that first link seems to have dried up.

Here's a more direct link to that famous article, right from "the horse's mouth" (or "the belly of the Beast"?)-http://www.nationalreview.com/12feb96/drug.html Here's a "Free Tommy" site-http://freetommychong.org/ and here's a recap of his sad and unnecessary story-http://www.laweekly.com/ink/04/02/features-mikulan.php. This is a Bill Maher article on the Drug War that I thought was great-http://www.safesearching.com/billmaher/blog/archives/000101.html.

[leftbend]

4. True Progressive

Another example of true progressive thinking from Dennis Kucinich. We could have a president with this policy instead of one trying to overthrow states rights and arresting and harassing medical marijuana patients in wheel chairs. This is off topic but is anyone aware of Dennis' stand on assisted suicide?
Peace