Holder resigns! What this means for medical and recreational marijuana.

The next Attorney General of the United States will be in charge of enforcing all federal laws, including Nixon's Controlled Substances Act, which lists cannabis as a schedule 1 hallucinogen.

Holder has followed Obama's lead; he has been permissive of medical and recreational shops selling buds in the open.  But will the next guy be?  What we need is an act of Congress (or the Court), amending the anachronistic controlling legislation.  Until then-

The next guy may be a Mormon, or even worse, a Republican.  It's a good job Holder's resigning now, to give his boss time to hire and indoctrinate his replacement.

Regardless, one thing the new AG can't do is conscript local or state law enforcement officers to enforce his objectives.  And the crux of any law is the enforcement of it.  Short of expanding the DEA until it's larger than the military (or deputizing soldiers to make arrests), city governments will dictate policy - under the command and control of the people.

Blaze on.

On Being a Pot-Smoking American Hindu

No, I haven’t memorized the Vedas or the Bhagavad-Gita.  I like several of the stories contained in those entertaining texts, though—the Greeks spun pretty good yarns too.  But the fact that I don’t worship each holy-writ word of them like radical fundamentalists pedestal-place the Bible doesn’t make me not a practicing Hindu.

Indeed, Hinduism only became a text-based religion once the Brits took over. Hindus never considered themselves a "group" until they were forced by political reasons (exacerbated by the imposition of their colonizers’ parliamentary system) to other Muslims. 

Hinduism pre-dates books.  It was only the Brahmins who could read throughout most of history after all.  (Just as Catholic priests had a monopoly on the interpretation of the Word until Martin Luther recognized: one requires no conduit to God.)

The reason that there are 30,000,000 Hindu deities is that each individual spiritual practice developed independently.  Whatever made sense to thee was valid.  This truth is what resonates with me. 

I learned while living in India that the purpose of the Hindu “religion” is to get in touch with innergod i.  There exists no strict doctrine— Hinduism mandates no proscriptions, reeks not of blind faith.  Hinduism is, quite simply, pure self-seeking, utilizing timeless techniques.  

Hinduism is natural mysticism (rather than a carrot-and-stick social control mechanism) in all of its incarnations—and it is much aided by cannabis sativa.

Marijuana is stress-relieving and peace-inducing.  It is also a mind focuser, and a spiritual aid.  Meditation is an invaluable ritual, found in many faiths (chanting the Rosary produces quite the same effect - albeit muted - as does singing Hare Krishna) and ingesting THC incontrovertibly facilitates “zoning in”.  Shaivites[1] have known as much for dozens of centuries.

Music is important to my spiritual practice.  The sympathetic vibrating of the understrings of the sitar explains Aum to me, if i focus.  Being high helps me to hear it.

Many scholars opine that Jesus may have journeyed to India.  If he did, he probably ingested hashish with holy ascetics, and wrapped his mind around thier concept of enlightenment.  Then he returned, enlightened, and devoted himself to uplifting others, exactly as a bodhisattva would.

Easter falls on 4-20 this year.  Coincidence?

Q: WWJD?
A: Inhale.

All I know is: the more I booze drink, the less I practice my faith.  Whereas, the more I engage in augmented sadhana[2], the more I calm and center myself, and become able to critically re-evaluate paradigms.

On this doubly holy day I humbly suggest: marijuana can and should be used as a sacrament.

---

[1] Shiva devotees

[2]  Spiritual practice, such as meditation, often performed under the influence of cannabis in Hindu and Tantric traditions

OBAMA ISSUES EXECUTIVE ORDER, DECLASSIFIES POT!

Gotcha ; )

As long as you're here though, you may be interested in yesterday's post (below).

WHY THE FEDS REFUSE TO RECOGNIZE THE MEDICAL VALUE OF CANNABIS SATIVA and THE REASON IT REMAINS A SCHEDULE I CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE and THE UNTENABLE NATURE OF THIS POSITION

Schedule I drugs, substances, or chemicals are defined as drugs with no currently accepted medical use. Schedule I drugs are the most dangerous drugs of all.[1]

            

Really, that bit about “no currently accepted medical use” is completely ridiculous. 

According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse (a division of the National Institutes of Health):

“The marijuana plant contains several chemicals that may prove useful for treating a range of illnesses or symptoms, leading many people to argue that it should be made legally available for medical purposes.  Medical marijuana is not recognized or approved as medicine by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). But scientific study of the active chemicals in marijuana, called cannabinoids, has led to the development of two FDA-approved medications already, and is leading to the development of new pharmaceuticals that harness the therapeutic benefits of cannabinoids while minimizing or eliminating the harmful side effects (including the “high”) produced by eating or smoking marijuana leaves.”[2]

  

Put simply, the feds would rather back a pill derived from cannabis than the plant itself—one which takes all the “fun” [3] out of it.

Contemporary medical research is focusing on two main cannabinoids, delta-9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and cannabidiol (CBD). 

According to NIDA:

“THC stimulates appetite and reduces nausea (and there are already approved THC-based medications for these purposes[4]) but it may also decrease pain, inflammation, and spasticity. CBD is a non-psychoactive [meaning: it doesn’t get you high] cannabinoid that may also be useful in reducing pain and inflammation, controlling epileptic seizures, and possibly even treating psychosis and addictions.

Research funded by the NIH is actively investigating the possible therapeutic uses of THC, CBD, and other cannabinoids to treat autoimmune diseases, cancer, inflammation, pain, seizures, substance use disorders, and other psychiatric disorders.”[5]

To paraphrase: While cannabinoids do seem to be totally awesome, we just need some more time (and money) to conduct some more research[6].

Officially:

“The FDA requires carefully conducted studies in large numbers of patients (hundreds to thousands) to accurately assess the benefits and risks of a potential medication. Thus far, there have not been enough large-scale clinical trials showing that benefits of the marijuana plant (as opposed to specific cannabinoid constituents) outweigh its risks in patients with the symptoms it is meant to treat.”[7]

Nevertheless, several prominent physicians, Dr. Sanjay Gupta and Dr. Andrew Weil for instance, wholeheartedly support the use of marijuana as a medication.

And not just for cancer, multiple sclerosis, and AIDS patients.

Stress is a legitimate medical issue, isn’t it? Laughter is in itself a medicine, say most of us…

Any integrative medicine practitioner worth his salt is over the moon about the benefits of meditation.  Cannabis sativa has been used as a meditation aid in India for dozens of centuries.  Yoga, by the way, was invented in India, by the best of us.  Bhang heads.

Regarding that point.  

Is cannabis really one of the “most dangerous drugs of all”?  Does the DOJ actually believe joint smokers behave like heroin addicts?  Um, more like they’ve had a few beers, bud.

What are the specific risks of ingesting the marijuana plant (as opposed to its specific cannabinoid constituents)?

According to NIDA:

“The known safety concerns of marijuana include impairment of short-term memory; altered judgment and decisionmaking; and mood effects, including severe anxiety (paranoia) or even psychosis (loss of touch with reality), especially following high-dose exposures. Marijuana also significantly reduces motor coordination and slows reaction time, which makes it very dangerous to use before driving a car. Additionally, although we do not yet know whether marijuana smoking contributes to lung cancer risk, it can cause or worsen other respiratory problems such as bronchitis or chronic cough. 

Growing evidence is showing that marijuana may be particularly harmful for young people: It may cause long-term or even permanent impairment in cognitive ability and intelligence when used regularly during adolescence, when the brain is still developing.

      Another safety concern is that, contrary to common belief, marijuana can be addictive.”[8]

Let’s investigate each of these “known safety concerns” in turn. 

First off, they’re right, being high is like dreaming awake—although one makes brilliant connections and transcends the training of one’s superego (which enables one to critically examine one’s paradigms), pot sucks re: short-term memory.  That’s why it’s important for a stoner to always carry a notebook or a Dictaphone.  That’s why musicians can never exactly replicate a jam.  And an expressionist painter could never paint it exactly that way again.  Cannabis fosters inspiration, which is by nature ephemeral, and impossible to recall.

Next, pot does alter one’s judgment and decisionmaking—in a good way.  One sees the beauty in things instead of trudging through one’s mundane routines while high on THC (as opposed to CBD); one chooses to respectfully interact with one’s fellow man, instead of fight him.

Does weed make one paranoid?  Only where it’s illegal.  Does it cause loss of touch with reality?  Rather, the opposite.

Clearly, one should not drive (or operate heavy machinery) stoned—even if one’s natural inclination is to drive 20 miles an hour under the speed limit (as opposed to recklessly, like on alcohol, which makes one feel invincible [in addition to uninhibited and irresistible]—how’s that for loss of touch with reality?), but, as has been opined countless times by minds keener than mine, in this regard (indeed, in all ways) marijuana is no more harmful than alcohol is.  Yes, cannabis should be regulated—like liquor is.

It is illogical to prohibit marijuana smoking because it might contribute to lung cancer risk when tobacco use is allowed.  Similarly, although cannabis, like anything good, can be addictive, it is far less addictive than nicotine (or alcohol, or schedule II analgesics like Vicodin).

But the feds’ main concern, of course (and rightly so) is the kids.

According to NIDA:

“(Marijuana) use has been increasing among young people since 2007, corresponding to a diminishing perception of the drug’s risks that may be associated with increased public debate over the drug’s legal status.” [9]

Sorry about that.

Given that many medical professionals seem to agree, I am willing to grant that “when [marijuana] is used heavily by young people, its effects on thinking and memory may last a long time or even be permanent.”[10] (my emphasis.)

Indeed, it is someone disconcerting to learn that “a large long-term study in New Zealand showed that people who began smoking marijuana heavily in their teens lost an average of 8 points in IQ between age 13 and age 38.”  However, it is imperative to note that, according to the same study: “Those who started smoking marijuana in adulthood did not show significant IQ declines.”[11]

The Director of the NIDA recently issued the following statement:

“Some teens are no doubt hearing and being influenced by marijuana’s many outspoken advocates, who claim that the drug does not deserve continued Schedule I status and that decades of prevention messaging have overstated its dangers. The ongoing public conversation over medical marijuana may contribute to the impression that, since some people use marijuana therapeutically, it couldn’t be that harmful.

Given the increases we are seeing in marijuana use among this age group, it is more crucial than ever to challenge the impression many of them have that marijuana is a benign, unfairly demonized substance.”[12]

Basically:  Pot might make kids stupider, thus the Just Say No campaign must continue, so we must continue to keep it Schedule I listed.

Setting aside for a moment the undeniable evidence that is the long list of brilliant thinkers who are proud members of the Marijuana Majority[13] since the government's own scientists admit that smoking marijuana as an adult does not lead to cognitive regression, it is nevertheless appropriate to criticize any “preventive messaging” campaign that insists on continued Schedule 1 designation.  

That is, a mixed message would not be hypocritical.  Pot is for grownups, like lots of things are (like alcohol is).  Kids aren’t idiots, they get it.  But when you claim it’s psychoactive like peyote and LSD and addictive like heroin you completely lose your credibility.

Even more imperatively: keeping marijuana illegal encourages black markets, and black marketeers don’t give a shit to whom they sell – including kids.


It does not follow from NIDA's reasoning that adults should be prohibited from using cannabis.

---

[1] Source: http://www.justice.gov/dea/druginfo/ds.shtml

[2] http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana-medicine

[3] The psychoactive chemicals of marijuana are precisely what engender creativity, mindfulness, interconnectivity, and dialogue, i.e., the “spiritual” uses of the plant.

[4] Dronabinol and Nabilone are used to treat nausea caused by chemotherapy and weight loss caused by AIDS

[5] http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana-medicine

[6] One of the best threads woven into Initiative 502 (which legalized recreation cannabis in Washington state) was the dedication of a percentage of tax revenue to research.

[7] Id.

[8] Id.

[9] http://www.drugabuse.gov/publications/drugfacts/marijuana

[10] Id.

[11] Id.

[12] http://www.drugabuse.gov/about-nida/directors-page/messages-director/2013/02/challenging-marijuana-myths

[13] Carl Sagan, Steven Colbert, Bill Maher, etc. (marijuanamajoirty.com)

Hawk Yeah!

Well I'd say that was pretty convincing.

A total team complete game domination.  An old school asswhupping.

Tough to pick a Super Bowl MVP.  Like the '85 Bears, it had to go to someone on the defense. Malcolm Smith was in the right place at the right couple of times (just like he was to seal the NFC championship); got no qualms that they gave it to him.  But it was the guys getting up in Old Manning's face who really deserved it.  They got Peyton's jersey plenty dirty (as New England couldn't).

And the offense, which kept cranking out 1st downs, deserves a ton of credit for keeping the other guys' most prolific offense in history off the field. Under-respected receivers Baldwin and Kearse got to taste end zone glory - the latter's spinning, defender-shucking romp was simply awesome - way to go, local kid!  As did Lynch, unlike his predecessor in Beast-dom, the late great Walter Payton.

Yes, this team and its players deserves to be compared with all-timers.

Percy Harvin finally earned his millions... in twelve electric seconds.  Richard Sherman was so good he played himself out of the limelight, for once.  Russell Wilson far outshined a first-ballot hall of famer.  The list goes on and on.  Every man contributed, every single Seahawk left it all on the field.

John Schneider, the man who put it all together, got plenty of well-deserved credit - when is the last time an exec got so much press?  So did coach Carroll, who mentioned to the 12th man over and over (as did commissioner Goodell, and Paul Allen, and everyone else).  I expect he led the guys through some new age meditation mumbo jumbo in the days prior or whatever - goddamn hippy, he'll never win in this league... right?

What a win for the city of Seattle.  Expectations were sky high all season, and our boys in blue lived up to every one of them.  Won the division.  Won home field.  Eliminated our rivals for the NFC crown.  Then, on the biggest stage of them all, executed an epic beat down.

Hawk Yeah!

Hawks Win! Seahawks triumph over 9ers in epic fashion! Too many huge plays to remember!

Super Bowl XL was too big for us, we weren’t ready.  But these '13 Hawks is.  Defense wins NFC Championship, the headlines will read tomorrow.  They only tested Sherman twice all evening; his interception assist in the end zone was ridiculous, obviously the play of the game.  Or was it, even?

I can think of six other candidates which deserve consideration.  The first is the heave to Baldwin which set up the Seahawks’ only points of the first half.  Because that showed Russell wasn’t cowed.  The next is Marshawn’s beast burst with that Walter Payton kick move; sweet as every flavor of Skittles at once.  How is that corporation not paying that man?  Who is his agent, that he’s doing “Stop Freakin’, Call Beacon” instead of national “Taste the Rainbow” ads.  Third best play of the game was the fourth down hail mary touchdown to Kearse; easily the best play of any other game.  Fourth was Kaepernick running and slinging, it has to be said: dude’s an incredible athlete – but I prefer Russell’s head.  That 9ers defense was all over number 3 all night, he had to scramble backwards like his video game avatar just to get rid of it and hopefully avoid intentional grounding.  Aldon Smith got after our QB, it has to be said.  Which is why I’m looking forward to the Super Bowl.  I don’t think Denver’s got half San Fran’s defense.  And Old Manning, for whom I have nothing but the ultimate respect (his hall of fame career and his demeanor as a role model family man have inarguably exceeded any football aficionado’s hopes for someone to look up to), is gonna have to run for his life against this pumped up D-FENSE!

3 takeaways in the 4th quarter, nuff said.  Especially that gamewinner - damn!  Who deserved the game ball? Everyone.  Blue’s D-Line dominated, stuffed Gore, and the secondary the pass completely.  Yes, we did let that Irish bitch loose a few times but held firm when it counted.  Like after that first-play fumble.  Important that the D held then, and indeed, kept us in the game throughout the 1^st half.  Easily could’ve gotten out of hand there in the 2^nd quarter. 17-3, 24-3 at the intermission.  Offense wa’nt doing shit at the beginning, but I love we kept poundin it with Skittle Beast (damn he got a sweet skittle skip – and he stiffarmed A.Smith to the ground that time too, changed -5 into +2) and it opened up a couple times.  You could tell it was going to after he got ten to start the second half.  Then he busted that great one.  Place went nuts.  Then you could smell a fumble coming, and it almost happened three times but Kaepernick zipped that lazer beam to quiet us, kinda.  Then Baldwin returned that kick almost to the house!  89’s second huge play of the night.  Best play candidate because with it the Hawks regained the momentum.  What’s number six?  The 2 delay of games attributable to the 12trh man?  Very possibly.  Maybe it was that S.F. assistant’s cheap shot on the sideline – fire and fine that fucker – maybe it was that long Hauschka kick that made our hated archrivals need a touchdown to win it in our house.  Maybe it was the plays their quarterback didn’t make with his legs because of the halftime adjustments by our Defensive Coordinator.  Maybe it was one of several forgotten third-down conversions (mostly to Baldwin) with which we retained possession.  But how can anyone deny the heroics of Navarro Bowman, who got his leg broken but held on to the ball at the goal line; whose martyrdom was somehow not reviewable / challengeable.  An injustice.  I like that Marshawn, in a soccer-like gesture, gave the ball right back, out of sportsmanship.  Did y’all notice that?  Or maybe you thought it was Karma.

C’mon Skittles.  Give the man a contract.

C’mon D.  Win us one more.

Go hoist that trophy,

Bring it home, Hawks. 

'Lone Survivor' : Long Game High Ground

That pretty young Afghan boy with the big eyes pondering why we decided to take the humanitarian route, that decidedly 'brown' Arab kid practicing our words; think about that.  

Those villagers helping Marky Mark were cool and made sense, as did the inevitable military brotherhood tripe – which is probably indubitably accurate.

Hollywood personalizing the soldiers with enhanced peccadillos was obvious, so too was the call for more hardware on the ground and in the air (subtext: it all could’ve been avoided given more "defense" contracts).  

But really, the movie was all about the importance of making an impression upon the next generation of our enemies’ doormats.  

Those few hero marines who perished in combat because they followed the rules of engagement wouldn’t want to be thought of as martyrs, except to their loved ones (by whom they inevitably will be). They were just doing their jobs, obeying the directive of their commander-in chief.

Because they’re Frogmen – Hoo-rah!  Maybe they were even actually cowards come crunchtime, who knows, who cares?  There’s no declassified evidence regarding any of this shit.  But that wouldn’t make for such a saleable story.  Hey, at least they put themselves there, which is more than one can say for the 99%.