Marijuana Growing - Politics

Going Rogue, An American Life

ChChoda — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 19:06:25 GMT

Indolent liberal reviews will be the order of the day, which is to be expected. But before you "moderates" get ahead of yourselves by critiquing a book you haven't read, just as you did with the two Obama books, take a moment to ponder your previous predictions for this "pretentious" "quitter" from Alaska. Didn't you relegate Governor Palin to the ash heap of history, never to be heard from again, except for as the butt end of the occasional bigoted joke? This phoenix is rising, and the abominable treatment she endured at the hands of the hateful liberal herd only served to strengthen her, and my, resolve to right this floundering nation. Keep up the slander; I'm buying two.

Berkeley Campus Take-over

fdd2blk — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 17:10:36 GMT

started a couple, hours ago. i've been watching it build up on the local news. they have taken over the main hall and are protesting next years fee hikes. there are riot cops out front and they have the building taped off. more students are showing up and joining in a so far peaceful rally in front of the building. i can't find any links yet. this could get BIG. or not. the next few hours will tell, ..... :joint::joint:

Reports suggest economy�s slowly rebounding

wen15 — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 06:46:56 GMT

Reports suggest economy�s slowly rebounding

By Bob Fernandez
INQUIRER STAFF WRITER
A spate of reports today from Philadelphia and across the nation pointed to an economy that, finally, is stabilizing and beginning to turn around, though slowly and weakly.
The manufacturing sector in the Philadelphia region continued healing in November, as business conditions improved for the fourth consecutive month and hiring plans appeared to have become firmer, the Philadelphia Federal Reserve Bank said in one of the reports, its monthly Business Outlook Survey.
Separately, the bank's president, Charles I. Plosser, said he was "less fearful" than he was three months ago of a double-dip recession, in which the economy would decline again.
The economy is "on the mend" and may strengthen in coming quarters, he said during an appearance in Singapore.
That will force the Fed to "struggle and debate" on the right time to raise interest rates to prevent inflation. Plosser, long a hawk in fighting inflation, has agreed with his Fed colleagues in recent months on the need to keep rates low for now to help end the economic downturn.
In other reports today, a private business group said its forward-looking index increased for the seventh straight month, signaling national economic growth into 2010.
Also, the U.S. Labor Department said new claims for unemployment benefits held steady in the latest week, a sign that layoffs may be letting up. Supporting that view, Pennsylvania officials said the state's jobless rate was unchanged in October at 8.8 percent. Still, that was 3 percentage points higher than a year ago.
Plosser, in his remarks in Asia, acknowledged weakness in the job market, saying there was no answer yet to when employment would turn around and adding that the economy was not yet "as strong as we would like it to be."
In the Philadelphia Fed's manufacturing survey, the broadest measure of activity rose to 16.7 this month from 11.5 in October. A zero reading indicates no growth in manufacturing, and a negative reading indicates a contraction or recession.
The survey's current employment index rose to about zero in November from minus 6.8 in October, meaning employment growth is flat.
Most measures in the survey improved, although some stayed in negative territory, indicating continuing concerns.
Factory capacity use - how much of their production capability factories are using - remains an issue.
About three of every five companies responding to the survey said their factories were operating at less than 70 percent of capacity. That compares with 8 percent of respondents who said factories operated at that low rate before the recession. Higher capacity rates lead to higher profits and employment.

All it takes is google to expose you

Masterofgenetics — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:42:55 GMT

Oh look at this google Chocolate Trip third and 5th pic you find me! Oh and google Texas growers and you find me on the second page, just google texas growers, so ever mother fucker that grows any thing in Texas that wants to find anything that other texas growers might grow them selves will also see me. WTF? so lets say your a Police officer in Texas and your wifey wants to grow Tomatoes so you google what other Texas Growers have going on in there Texas gardens! YOU FIND ME! I knew of this problem a long time ago, but I never understood the seriousness of the problem.

10 hrs of debate on saturday; vote 8 pm

Big P — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 02:08:47 GMT

sneaky democrates rushing the bill to a vote on saturday

Originally published 11:24 a.m., November 19, 2009, updated 01:19 p.m., November 19, 2009

Health bill could get 34-hour reading in Senate

Joseph Curl
The 2,074-page Senate health care bill would take 34 hours to read cover to cover -- and that's just what Sen. Tom Coburn wants done on the Senate floor.

The Oklahoma Republican has threatened to invoke parliamentary rules to force the Senate clerk (or more likely, a team of clerks) to read the massive bill before the full Senate begins formal debate on the legislation.
The move is strictly according to Senate rules, which say any senator can demand a bill be read in its entirety before debate begins. While Democrats could, if they wish, repeatedly make motions to end the soliloquy, Republicans on the floor could object, and the reading would continue.

What's even more interesting is that Senate Rule XIV (paragraph 2) states that every bill and joint resolution "shall receive three readings prior to its passage."

"Upon demand of a senator, these readings shall be on three different legislative days," the rules say.

A little quick math shows that at a minute a page -- an easily achieved pace since the pages are double spaced and in a rather large type face -- it would take 34.5 hours to read straight through the measure put together this week by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Republican leadership and gallery staff say the reading -- with occasional pauses and sips of water for parched throats -- could take more like 48 to 54 hours.

Pity the poor Senate clerks.
See how fast you can read the bill.

California - the Jack Herer Initiative

420hydro — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 23:52:09 GMT

This is very important to all of you who live in California:

The Jack Herer initiative to legalize marijuana receives official title and summary

The Office of the California Attorney General released the official title and summary of the Jack Herer California Cannabis Hemp Initiative Wednesday. The proponent has until 19 Apr 10 to gather 433,971 valid signatures to qualify for the November 2010 ballot.

Three other initiatives are currently gathering signatures and the Regulate, Control, and Tax Cannabis Act of 2010 has announced they have at least 500,000 signatures and are confident they will have enough to qualify.

The official title is "Changes California Law to Legalize marijuana and Release Non-Violent marijuana Offenders from Jail." Thus, it will be easy to differentiate from the other three as it is the only one that does not contain the word "tax" as well as the only one to contain the word "jail".

read more: http://j.mp/43nVKh

Tax info for a friend.

Haul me to Heaven — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 22:37:14 GMT

The following is being provided to everyone so that you may see some things about the Internal Revenue Code.
As with anything of this type- contact a competent attorney (and I mean competent) before you do anything. By law I have to say this.

Please also note that this letter is in responce to any reply from the first. Most never ever receive a reply.

Here is a long post but worth the read and info it contains.

Letter of Demand

Certified Mail #

Name of Agent -Examiner
(address for the above)

Internal Revenue Service
Dear Agent :

I am in receipt of your form letter (form number), dated ________(copy attached) that carries your stamped signature and which claims that you have been assigned to examine my “federal tax returns for the years shown above”. Your letter also states that you have set an appointment date of __________ for me to come to your office and bring with me a rather long list of personal documents. Also enclosed with your letter was your Privacy Act Notice #609.

It appears that you are proceeding on a presumption that I have some obligation to attend a meeting that you scheduled, without first confirming that I have an obligation or even that such date is convenient for me, if I did have an obligation. You are also proceeding on the assumption or presumption that I am a “person liable for” or a “person made liable for” a tax, and that I am one subject to your authority.

Agent ________, if that is the case, you are in error and you are proceeding on an erroneous assumption or presumption. I deny any claim of any obligation and any claim that I am one who is liable for or subject to a tax or that I have any requirement to waive my fundamental rights to be secure in my personal papers and effects. I further deny that I have any obligation to attend a meeting with you or to give personal testimony or respond to questions about my personal affairs or that you have any facts or basis of authority to make any inquiry of me.

I know of nothing that makes me subject to or liable for any internal revenue tax. Any forms or returns that I may have submitted in the past were submitted because of misinformation and disinformation that originated from your Service which implied that some obligation existed, when in fact no obligation actually did. All such documents submitted under those false pretenses are hereby repudiated.

I claim all of my rights to enter into any private contract and to be secure in my personal papers and effects. I also claim my right not to be a witness against myself by oral or written testimony. I further claim all other rights enumerated in the Constitution of the United States of
America and the Constitution of the State of ________ and all other rights not enumerated as expressed in the 9th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America.

I am not one who exists by, or was introduced by, the authority of any State and, for certain, the United States. I deny that I am subject to or liable for any tax or come within the purview of any statute that would require the waiver of my fundamental rights.

Chief Justice Marshal stated in McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316, at page 431, “That the power to tax involves the power to destroy.” I am not one whom the United States or the State has authority to destroy. I am immune from your “statutory scheme” as a matter of right and not because of any statutory privilege.

Your Privacy Act Notice #609 confirms my determination where it specifically states that your “legal right to ask for information is Internal Revenue Code sections 6001, 6011, and 6012(a) and their regulations. They say that you must file a return or statement with us for any tax you are liable for.” I absolutely agree. Being liable for a tax is obviously a prerequisite to any requirement to make a return.

Sections 6001 and 6011 clearly state that returns shall be made by persons who are “liable for” or “made liable for” a tax.

Section 6012 states that returns shall be made by “every individual having for the taxable year.”

The term “taxable year” is defined in section 441(b) as the “taxpayer’s annual accounting period”.

Section 7701(a)(14) defines the term “taxpayer” to mean “any person subject to any internal revenue tax”. Section 1313(b) defines the term “taxpayer” to mean “any person subject to a tax under the applicable revenue law.

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit tells us that: We see no distinction between the phrases “liable for such tax” and “subject to a tax”.
Houston Street Corp. v. C.IR., 84 F.2d 821, at 822 (5th Cir. 1936).

I can find no provision that makes me liable for or subject to any revenue tax or imposes any obligation of legal duty upon me and, to date, I am unable to obtain any information from your Service to document your presumption that I am one who is liable for or subject to any revenue tax.

Before any determination could be made as to whether a particular individual was subject to or liable for a tax, it would first have to be determined what it is, exactly, that is being taxed. Is it people? Is it property? Or is it some revenue taxable activity? And in which section of the internal revenue laws is there a tax imposed on that particular subject?

Next, there would have to be a section in the internal revenue laws stating who is subject to or liable for that particular tax.

In 1937, the United States Supreme Court made it clear that capitation taxes and taxes on property must be apportioned among the States according to population. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548, at 58 1-582 (1937).
In 1960, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit verified the same thing.

Indeed, the requirement for apportionment is pretty strictly limited to taxes on real and personal property and capitation taxes. Penn Mutual Indemnity Co. v. C.IR., 277 F.2d 16, at 19-20
(3rd Cir. 1960).

I find no federal tax that has been apportioned among the States as would be required for capitation taxes and taxes on property; real or personal.

I do find sections in the Internal Code that impose taxes on activities such as the importation of tobacco products and a section in the Code that make the importer of the tobacco products liable for that tax.
For example:

The manufacturer or importer of tobacco products shall be liable for the taxes imposed thereon by section 5701. 26 US.C. 5703(a) (1).
I find no revenue law that imposes a tax on any activity (or property) that has anything to do with me, and I find no revenue law that makes me subject to or liable for any revenue tax.

Based on the above, I deny being subject to or liable for any revenue tax.

I deny being a “taxpayer” as that term is defined in sections 1313(b) and 7701(a)(14).

I deny having a “taxable year” as that term is defined in section 441(b).

I further find that section 63 of the Code defines “taxable income” as “adjusted gross income”, and section 62 of the Code defines “adjusted gross income” as the “taxpayer’s” deductions subtracted from his gross income. Therefore, I deny having “taxable income” or
“adjusted gross income” as those terms are defined in the Internal Revenue Code.

The Supreme Court has stated in a number of decisions that it is the established rule not to extend taxing statutes beyond the clear import of the language used or to enlarge their operations so as to embrace matters not specifically pointed out. The Court further stated that in case of doubt the taxing statutes are construed most strongly against the Government, and in favor of those upon who the tax is sought to be laid. Gould v. Gould, 245 U.S. 151, 153 and United States v. Merriam, 263 U.S. 179, 187-188.

I have every desire to obey all laws that apply to me, but I am fearful that any participation with you or your Service will constitute a voluntary waiver of those rights and moot any future claim to those rights.

If you agree that I am neither subject to nor liable for any revenue tax, I respectfully make this timely demand that you ABATE your claim, correct your error, and notify me in writing of the actions you have taken.

If you disagree, I respectfully make this timely demand that you provide me with copies of the following documents. Also, I respectfully demand that you provide me with an itemized list of all of the herein requested documents and information which your Service does not have.

1. All records, if any, of determinations or decisions made that I, ____(your name), have a “legal duty” to furnish personal information to you or your Service;
2. All records, if any, of any determinations or decisions made that I am one who is, or was, “subject to” or “liable for” any revenue tax imposed by the national government of the United States of America;

3. All records, if any, of any determinations or decisions made that I am, or was, a “taxpayer” as that term is defined in section 1313(b) and/or 7701(a)(14) of the Internal Revenue Code;

4. All records, if any, of any determinations or decisions made that I have ever had a “taxable year” as defined in section 441(b) of the Internal Revenue Code;

5. All records, if any, of any determinations or decisions made that I have ever had “taxable income” as defined in section 63 of the Internal Revenue Code;

6. All records, if any, of any determinations or decisions made that I have ever had “adjusted gross income” as defined in section 62 of the Internal Revenue Code;

7. All records, if any, of any determinations or decisions made that I am an individual who is, or was, required to pay a tax, keep records and/or submit forms to the national government of the United States of America or to the Internal Revenue Service;

8. All records, if any, of any determinations or decisions made that I am an “individual taxable” under the revenue laws of the national government of the United States of America;

9. All records, if any, of any determinations or decisions asserting that I am a “tax protester”;

10. The documents that reflect the name, title, business address, bond number and delegation of authority to make such determinations or decisions of each and every person who made the determinations or decisions referred to in items numbered 2 through 9 above;

11. The documents that reflect the name, title, business address, bond number and delegation of authority of each and every supervisor of the persons referred to in item number 10 above;

12. The specific documents of fact relied upon in the making of all the above itemized determinations or decisions referred to in items numbered 2 through 9 above, which shall include, but shall not be limited to, any contracts or waivers of rights submitted by me;

13. The specific documents of fact relied upon to support any determination or allegation that I am protesting a tax and which would reflect whether I am allegedly protesting a capitation tax, a property tax or a tax on a revenue taxable activity;

14. Any and all documents including but not limited to statutes, which provided the basis upon which the determinations and decisions referred to in items numbered 2 through 9 above were made and which identify the subject of the purported “tax” and which specifically identify the subject of the purported “tax” as either people, property or activities;

15. Any and all documents classified as returns, including, but not limited to, so-called “dummy returns”, so-called “substitute for returns” and/or so-called “information returns”, if any, which have been filed in my name;

16. Any and all documents classified as assessments, if any, pertaining to me;

17. Any and all documents classified as Notices and Demands, if any, for payments which pertain to me;

18. Any and all documents classified as Notices sent to me to the effect that I am one who is required to pay such tax or submit forms, including, but not limited to, any and all Notices which provided an opportunity for a hearing wherein certain issues of law can be addressed by an impartial person who is competent to address issues of law and wherein all due process of law requirements will be met;

19. Any and all documents that reflect the name, business address, bond number and delegation of authority of each and every person who made such returns, made such assessments, and sent such Notices and Demands, if any, referred to in items numbered 15 through 18 above;

20. Any and all documents that reflect the name, business address, bond number and delegation of authority of each and every supervisor of the persons referred to in item number 19 above;

21. Any and all documents that reflect the name, business address, bond
number and delegation of authority of each and every person who provided legal counsel to the Secretary of the Treasury and/or any of his delegates regarding any and all of the determinations, decisions and documents referred to herein;

22. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which identify the individual, if any exist, who has the authority to determine whether or not I am subject to or liable for any revenue tax. (This is to be distinguished from authority to determine the liability (amount of tax due) from one who is subject to or liable for a revenue tax.);

23. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which make me subject to or liable for a revenue tax;

24. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which detail and explain how I came within the taxing jurisdiction or authority of the national government of the United States of America and/or the Internal Revenue Service;

25. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which show specifically how I came to have a legal obligation, if any, to the national government of the United States of America and/or to the Internal Revenue Service;

26. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which show that I was required by law to make a tax return, or a report of income, and/or to pay a tax to the national government of the United States of America and/or to the Internal Revenue Service;

27. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which detail or show that I was involved in some activity that is a lawful subject of taxation and which statute, if any, under the laws of the national government of the United States of America, that imposes a
tax on that activity;

28. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which show or explain how I come within a “taxable class” under the laws of the national government of the United States of America;

29. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which show or explain how, by merely exercising my right to work, I came within the taxing authority of the national government of the United States of America;

30. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which show or explain what activity I am involved in or what event has taken place, if any, that obligates me to enter into the purview of a taxing scheme that requires the waiver of my rights as guaranteed under the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution;

31. Any and all documents, statutes or regulations, if such exist, which were signed by me, if any exist, which constitutes the basis for a presumption that I am one who is liable for or subject to a revenue tax and required to submit forms, books and records to the national government of the United States of America and/or the Internal Revenue Service;

32. All writings (including reports) proposed to be offered into evidence in the event this case is taken to a court of law or a hearing wherein all due process of law requirements will be met;

33. All other writings or things relevant and admissible in evidence; and

34. Copies of, or the opportunity to copy all statutes, rules, regulations, procedures and all other documents affecting and relating to the procedures installed by or for the Internal Revenue Service to protect the rights of individuals who are neither liable for nor subject to a revenue tax.

If this form of Demand is insufficient to meet the legal and lawful criteria for making such demand, please send me the format that is specifically prescribed by law with instructions on how to follow that format.

I expect those demanded documents and/or records to be organized in an intelligible manner, such that they are capable of being read and understood by one possessing average skills, intellect and training.

If for some reason any part of those demanded documents and/or records are codified in such a manner that they cannot be readily understood, I expect to receive, additionally, all required decoding documents and/or records.

Please make sure that you provide an itemized list of any of the above items you are unable to produce.

If this formal Demand for production of documents and/or records is improperly addressed to you in your official capacity, please forward this demand to the “appropriate person” thereafter immediately informing me of such forwarding, inclusive of such “appropriate person’ s” name, title, mailing address with the correct Postal Zone, and with the date of origin and location of such forwarding action, if any.

My authority for making this timely demand for verification of your determinations and authority is a matter of right and supported by the decision of the United States Supreme Court as follows:

Whatever the form in which the Government functions, anyone entering into an arrangement with the Government takes the risk of having accurately ascertained that he who purports to act for the Government stays within the bounds of his authority. Federal Crop Insurance Corporation v. Merrill, 332 U.S. 380 at 384 (1947).

I will expect your response to my demand for abatement and correction of your error or for your correction of any error you claim I have made, along with the documents demanded to support your position, within 30 days of your receipt of this letter of demand and inquiry. If you
need additional time, please make your request in writing and it will be granted.

If I do not hear from you in 30 days, your lack of response will establish the presumption that neither you nor those in your Service has the documentation to make or support any presumptions that I am one who comes within the purview of your statutory authority whereby you can make any claim of a requirement or obligation upon me.

Sincerely,
__________________________________________
(Type Name) _____________________________

Private American citizen

VERIFICATION

I declare under penalty of perjury that I have read the foregoing letter and know its contents, and to the best of my knowledge the statements therein are true and correct, except as to those matters upon which I rely on information and/or belief, and as to those matters I do believe them to be true and correct.

Dated: ______________________
(Your signature again)
(Your typewritten name again)

(NOTARY PUBLIC’S JURAT)

Noam Chomsky, good or evil?

medicineman — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 18:01:42 GMT

Chomsky on politics:

Chomsky has stated that his "personal visions are fairly traditional anarchist ones, with origins in The Enlightenment and classical liberalism"[59] and he has praised libertarian socialism.[60] He is a sympathizer of anarcho-syndicalism [61] and a member of the IWW union.[62] He has published a book on anarchism titled, "Chomsky on Anarchism", which was published by the anarchist book collective, AK Press, in 2006. Noam Chomsky has been engaged in political activism all of his adult life and expressed opinions on politics and world events which are widely cited, publicized and discussed. Chomsky has in turn argued that his views are those which the powerful do not want to hear, and for this reason he is considered an American political dissident. Some highlights of his political views:

Power, unless justified, is inherently illegitimate. The burden of proof is on those in authority to demonstrate why their elevated position is justified. If this burden can't be met, the authority in question should be dismantled. Authority for its own sake is inherently unjustified. An example of a legitimate authority is that exerted by an adult to prevent a young child from wandering into traffic.[63]

That there isn't much difference between slavery, and renting one's self to an owner, or "wage slavery." He feels that it is an attack on personal integrity that destroys and undermines our freedoms. He holds workers should own and control their own workplace, a view held (as he notes) by the Lowell Mill Girls.[64]

Very strong criticisms of the foreign policy of the United States. Specifically, he claims double standards in a foreign policy preaching democracy and freedom for all, while promoting, supporting and allying itself with non-democratic and repressive organizations and states such as Chile under Augusto Pinochet, and argues that this results in massive human rights violations. He often argues that America's intervention in foreign nations, including the secret aid given to the Contras in Nicaragua, an event of which he has been very critical, fits any standard description of terrorism.[65]

He has argued that the mass media in the United States largely serve as a propaganda arm and "bought priesthood"[66] of the U.S. government and U.S. corporations, with the three parties all largely intertwined through common interests. In a famous reference to Walter Lippmann, Chomsky along with his coauthor, Edward S. Herman has written that the American media manufactures consent among the public.

He has opposed the U.S. global "war on drugs", claiming its language to be misleading, and referring to it as "the war on certain drugs." He favors education and prevention rather than military or police action as a means of reducing drug use.[67] In an interview in 1999, Chomsky argued that, whereas crops such as tobacco receive no mention in governmental exposition, other non-profitable crops, such as marijuana, are specifically targeted because of the effect achieved by persecuting the poor:[68] He has stated:

US domestic drug policy does not carry out its stated goals, and policymakers are well aware of that. If it isn't about reducing substance abuse, what is it about? It is reasonably clear, both from current actions and the historical record, that substances tend to be criminalized when they are associated with the so-called dangerous classes, that the criminalization of certain substances is a technique of social control.[69]

Critical of the American capitalist system and big business, he describes himself as a libertarian socialist who sympathizes with anarcho-syndicalism and is also critical of Leninist branches of socialism. He also believes that libertarian socialist values exemplify the rational and morally consistent extension of original unreconstructed classical liberal and radical humanist ideas to an industrial context. Specifically he believes that society should be highly organized and based on democratic control of communities and work places. He believes that the radical humanist ideas of his two major influences, Bertrand Russell and John Dewey, were "rooted in the Enlightenment and classical liberalism, and retain their revolutionary character."[70]

Chomsky has stated that he believes the United States remains the "greatest country in the world",[71] a comment that he later clarified by saying, "Evaluating countries is senseless and I would never put things in those terms, but that some of America's advances, particularly in the area of free speech, that have been achieved by centuries of popular struggle, are to be admired."[72] He has also said "In many respects, the United States is the freest country in the world. I don't just mean in terms of limits on state coercion, though that's true too, but also in terms of individual relations. The United States comes closer to classlessness in terms of interpersonal relations than virtually any society."[73]

Chomsky objects to the criticism that anarchism is inconsistent with support for government welfare, stating in part:

One can, of course, take the position that we don't care about the problems people face today, and want to think about a possible tomorrow. OK, but then don't pretend to have any interest in human beings and their fate, and stay in the seminar room and intellectual coffee house with other privileged people. Or one can take a much more humane position: I want to work, today, to build a better society for tomorrow -- the classical anarchist position, quite different from the slogans in the question. That's exactly right, and it leads directly to support for the people facing problems today: for enforcement of health and safety regulation, provision of national health insurance, support systems for people who need them, etc. That is not a sufficient condition for organizing for a different and better future, but it is a necessary condition. Anything else will receive the well-merited contempt of people who do not have the luxury to disregard the circumstances in which they live, and try to survive.[74]

According to Chomsky: "I'm a boring speaker and I like it that way…. I doubt that people are attracted to whatever the persona is…. People are interested in the issues, and they're interested in the issues because they are important."[75] "We don't want to be swayed by superficial eloquence, by emotion and so on."[76]

He holds views that can be summarized as anti-war but not strictly pacifist. He prominently opposed the Vietnam War and most other wars in his lifetime. He expressed these views through a variety of protest methods, such as withholding taxes and peace walks. He published a number of articles about the war in Vietnam, including "The Responsibility of Intellectuals". However, he maintains that U.S. involvement in World War II was probably justified, with the caveat that a preferable outcome would have been to end or prevent the war through earlier diplomacy. In particular, he believes that the dropping of nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki were "among the most unspeakable crimes in history".[77]

He has a broad view of free-speech rights, especially in the mass media; he opposes censorship and refuses to take legal action against those who may have libeled him.[78]

He has made major criticisms of Israel and supporters of Israel, arguing that "supporters of Israel are in reality supporters of its moral degeneration and probable ultimate destruction", and that "Israel's very clear choice of expansion over security may well lead to that consequence"[79]

Chomsky has frequently stated that there is no connection between his work in linguistics and his political views, and is generally critical of the idea that competent discussion of political topics requires expert knowledge in academic fields. In a 1969 interview, he said regarding the connection between his politics and his work in linguistics:

"I still feel myself that there is a kind of tenuous connection. I would not want to overstate it but I think it means something to me at least. I think that anyone's political ideas or their ideas of social organization must be rooted ultimately in some concept of human nature and human needs". (New Left Review, 57, Sept. – Oct. 1969, p. 21)

Sounds like a modified libertarian to me, hell, I could be this kind of libertarian, in fact I am. I like this guy. Just watched a speech he gave, very impressive. He actually knows what the fuck is happening. You libertarians would be well suited to check him out.

please check your weapons at the door

fdd2blk — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 16:44:16 GMT

i guess that's next, ....

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/polit...-70461587.html

Here's Looking at You, Tiburon

Cameras will take pictures of each vehicle coming and going into Peninsula town

Smile if you're driving into Tiburon, you'll be on camera.
There are only two ways to get into the Peninsula town and within six months, both of those entry points will be monitored by cameras.
Tiburon's Town Council on Wednesday night unanimously approved the controversial proposal to install the cameras that will snap pictures of the license plates of each vehicle coming and going to the coastal community. The vote authorizes up to almost $200,000 to mount cameras on Tiburon Boulevard and Paradise Drive -- the only two two roads in and out of Tiburon.

Conservatives + liberals

medicineman — Thu, 19 Nov 2009 15:41:03 GMT

Conservatives and liberals come together to support Ron Pauls legislation concerning the fed and the trillions in hand-outs.
Call, write, email, or talk to your congressmen and let them know, this insanity will not continue. We must get rid of these lobbiests that bribe our congressmen into letting the Fed get away with our money and give it to the banksters and wall street.
There is a growing grass roots movement accross party lines to stop this lobbying insanity. Don't let congress gut Ron Pauls bill. Contact them and tell them to leave it alone.
These vermin need public exposure.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_271384.html OR

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/1..._n_361389.html

Conservatives seem more like radicals than conservatives

medicineman — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 21:40:28 GMT

Has anyone noticed that the conservatives really act more like radicals than conservatives? They are alweays ranting and raving about Obama. Obama's doing this, or he's doing that, Obamacare, etc. Really now, you guys aren't that conservative:

con⋅serv⋅a⋅tive /kənˈsɜrvətɪv/
�adjective 1.disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.2.cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate. 3.traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit. 4.(often initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.

Radical/radicalism on the right:
Far right, extreme right, hard right, ultra-right or radical right are terms used to discuss the qualitative or quantitative position a group or person occupies within a political spectrum. The terms far right and far left are often used to imply that someone is an extremist.These individuals rarely see the big picture, but have a very narrow view of what is going on, usually championed on by some radical leader.

jesse ventura new tv show

maxamus1 — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:33:37 GMT

should be good. it will be on trutv sometime this month or next. cant wait to hear what he has to add on some of the things going on.

*BEYOND THE PAIL!!! Obama: Too much debt could fuel double-dip recession

Big P — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 18:05:51 GMT

is this motherfucker on the same earth as us!!!???? motherfucker goes on an insane selfserving spending spree and now has the nerve to say this!!!!!:cuss::cuss::cuss::cuss: im really starting to think this guy isnt all up there, what an assclown, there is 0 possibility he will be re-elected

Obama: Too much debt could fuel double-dip recession

Wed Nov 18, 2009 6:14am EST

BEIJING, Nov 18 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama gave his sternest warning yet about the need to contain rising U.S. deficits, saying on Wednesday that if government debt were to pile up too much, it could lead to a double-dip recession.

With the U.S. unemployment rate at 10.2 percent, Obama told Fox News his
administration faces a delicate balance of trying to boost the economy and spur job creation while putting the economy on a path toward long-term deficit reduction.

His administration was considering ways to accelerate economic growth, with tax measures among the options to give companies incentives to hire, Obama said in the interview with Fox conducted in Beijing during his nine-day trip to Asia.

"It is important though to recognize if we keep on adding to the debt, even in the midst of this recovery, that at some point, people could lose confidence in the U.S. economy in a way that could actually lead to a double-dip recession," he said.

Fox News, which released a transcript of the interview, showed that comment by Obama on Wednesday morning and said the full discussion would be broadcast later in the day. (Reporting by Caren Bohan; Editing by John O'Callaghan)

Joe Biden on the Daily Show

MexicanWarlord420 — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 05:33:45 GMT

I thought it was interesting. Anyone else watch it?

Palins also supposed to making some t.v. appearances. I'm not sure when

The growing pot economy

blazinbudsforever — Wed, 18 Nov 2009 04:04:36 GMT

Freep.com

MICHIGAN'S MEDICAL marijuana

The growing pot economy

Opportunities ripen for new businesses

BY DAWSON BELL
FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

The tailspin may be over, but no one's suggesting that bedrock industries of the Michigan economy like cars and real estate are headed for boom times again.
PLACE AN AD ON FREEP.COM

The Michigan marijuana economy, on the other hand, appears to be going gangbusters.
Once largely underground, activity linked to the cultivation and use of pot is now in full public view thanks to voter approval in 2008 of marijuana use for medicinal purposes.
Equipment manufacturers, retailers, doctors, lawyers and publishers are suddenly advertising, hanging up shingles, opening storefronts and building growing equipment all over the state.
But suppliers of the newly defined medicine -- the certified caregivers who can grow up to 12 plants a year for as many as five clients -- are, so far, less visible in part because the distinction between legal commerce and criminal activity isn't always clear.
"There's a whole lot going on," said Matthew Abel, a Detroit attorney who has become a sort of medical marijuana specialist, "and it's going to keep growing."
Like a weed.
Medical pot opportunities flourish

Rick Ferris worked 25 years in construction until a debilitating leg condition took him off ladders. Then he got into landscaping and was doing OK until 2008, when "every laid-off guy with a truck" in southeast Michigan started mowing lawns.

But Ferris isn't complaining. In fact, things are looking up at Big Daddy's, site of his latest venture, an Oak Park facility to manufacture hydroponic growing systems. The kind used for growing marijuana.

Ferris, 46, is one of an increasing number of Michiganders looking to cash in on last year's voter-approved initiative that legalized the use of medical marijuana. In addition to his manufacturing operation (which shares space with the still-operating landscape business), Ferris is set to publish next month the first issue of the Michigan Medical marijuana magazine.

So far, so good, he said in a recent interview.

Since getting under way in the spring, Ferris has hired five employees, three of them full-time. He has sold at least 140 hydroponic (soilless) growing systems and said without them, the landscaping business would have closed.

"I figured it was either jump in front or be left behind," he said.

Nobody can say how many of his fellow Michiganders are looking to make a living in the legal marijuana trade. But no one questions that the number is expanding rapidly.

In the first six months they were available, Michigan's Department of Community Health issued 5,100 certificates for the legal use of marijuana for people with chronic or debilitating illness. That number is expected to climb, although no one is guessing how high.

In the meantime, activists and entrepreneurs are looking for ways to make pot available to those who need it and to cash in. Or both.

In Southfield, a four-doctor medical practice opened in May that specializes in patients who require certification to legally use marijuana. It calls itself the Michigan Medical marijuana Certification Center.

The center just hired four more employees and now have 11, including the doctors, said the firm's office manager, who asked that his name not be published.

The office manager said he recognized, as a medical marijuana patient himself, the need and opportunity for a specialized practice after an unpleasant experience with another clinic. But he's unsure what the prospects are for the long run because the rules governing medical marijuana are such a muddle that many potential growers and patients might steer clear.

"It could be really good for Michigan's economy if they clarified the statute," he said.

Matthew Abel, a Detroit attorney and erstwhile Green Party political candidate, said the medical pot law has been such a boon for his business he might "finally have to hire some staff."

Abel said the rush has come in three waves, first from patients inquiring about certification, then from caregivers (those authorized under the law to grow marijuana for patients) and lately from people interested in how someone might set up a retail sales operation or dispensary. His position: "My feeling is that anything is legal that isn't illegal."

Of course, much of the potential profit in marijuana-related commerce lies in selling the stuff. But Abel points out that the scale of sales permitted under Michigan statute appear aimed at keeping commerce at a low level.

Caregivers are authorized to possess up to a dozen plants for each of five clients and be reasonably compensated.

Larger commercial operations might be possible if a group of medical marijuana caregivers formed a cooperative, but no one in Michigan, including law enforcement, is exactly sure how.

Which might explain why none of the operations currently soliciting Michigan marijuana customers online returned calls from the Free Press over the last week.

Earlier this fall in Troy, an entrepreneur who told city officials he planned to set up grow rooms at a facility on Rochester Road was informed by the city attorney such use was illegal under federal law.

Two weeks ago, in a posting on the Michigan Medical marijuana Association's Web site, he said he's going to do it, anyway.

That frontier spirit is not uncommon in the emerging world of legal drug trafficking.

Another posting on the MMMA Web site announces the launch of an enterprise that will "track costs and PAY TAXES for MM related transactions."

"Although no money has been made yet, I have had a ton of fun, never smoked so much killer weed in my life," the president of the enterprise, which is a legally registered business, reported.