Thanks, congress. Obama can say anything he wants to woo the people, don't matta. And while we roll back our environmental commitment, China launches their Green Energy Revolution. Nice. Also the headline is yet another example of Raw Story crap. I like their converage, but the editing sucks.

Just the guy for the job. Read the comments, too. They're usually interesting to read, if not educational.

In case you're wondering, the US trade deficit continues to widen.

AND FOR THE GOOD NEWS!!!!
Rhode Island backs medical marijuana retailers. About damn time. Another example of garbage legislation. It is obvious at this point to any right-thinking individual that actually knows what they're talking about that mj should be legalized. Period.

Oh oh oh, I just noticed. Lots of interesting stuff today on RS. Peter Schiff considering senate run He's on the daily show, and manages to keep Stewart from throwing him off with the constant joking. (not that that is ever Stewart's intention)

Later

Bongs for science

This is your brain on drugs
Some Harvard potheads made a bong to be used with individuals in an MRI machine, complete with erlenmeyer flask chamber, everyday headshop parts, a mask to inhale it through, and even an exhaust system to keep the stink outside.
They intend on doing some imaging to figure out what effects that nicotine and mj have on your brain, specifically looking at addiction.
Pretty cool, maybe they'll once and for all prove that mj doesn't get one addicted in any significant physical way, and we'll have some more infoammunition to get some reasonable legislation through.
Anyway, that's it

Edit:
Hell yea, I just made the blog wider. Now pictures will post a little more easily. Let me know if what I did causes any glitches or anything. Peace

Boom Shakalaka!

Marijuana good for memory, sort of.

That is all

Edit:
Actually, no, that's not all.
This video is scary. I haven't finished it, though.

Mindless Patriotism and International Arrogance -- That is the American Way!

I just wanted to start out by saying that I fixed the second Colbert video below and that everybody should check it out if you haven't yet.

I've always been interested in politics because of the government's ability to control truth. The power to change reality for a whole nation lies in the ability to alter language to make issues and events sound less tragic or urgent, while withholding the actual facts or presenting alternatives that legitimize the weak argument of the opposition. It's all in the wording -- It isn't escalation, it's a surge; we don't torture, we use enhanced interrogation techniques; It isn't called an invasion, it's called a defensive pre-emptive strike. This is propaganda, and our country is not above this.

This one particular article caught my eye about the bickering between John McCain and Barack Obama over 60's radical William Ayers. Ayers was a member of the group 'The Weather Underground', which was a violent, Communist opposition to Vietnam and American imperialism. The issue was brought up during the recent debate in Philly because of Obama's comparison of Ayers to Republican Senator Tom Coburn , "who during his campaign once said that it might be appropriate to apply the death penalty to those who carried out abortions." This prompted McCain to criticize Obama for not denouncing Ayers. To go back to my point on wording I wanted to just show a couple excerpts from the article (emphasis added).

Sen. John McCain highlighted Sen. Barack Obama's affiliation with a Vietnam-era radical yesterday, the latest indication that the general election campaign is likely to see a heavy dose of cultural politics.

Yesterday, McCain (Ariz.) drew a sharp distinction between Ayers and Coburn, arguing that Obama's analogy showed the Illinois Democrat holds values that are out of the mainstream.

Obama's relationship with Ayers, McCain told Stephanopoulos, "is open to question.... Because if you're going to associate and have as a friend and serve on a board and have a guy kick off your campaign that says he's unrepentant, that he wished bombed more -- and then, the worst thing of all, that, I think, really indicates Senator Obama's attitude, is he had the incredible statement that he compared Mr. Ayers, an unrepentant terrorist, with Senator Tom Coburn, Senator Coburn, a physician who goes to Oklahoma on the weekends and brings babies into life -- comparing those two -- I mean, that's not -- that's an attitude, frankly, that certainly isn't in keeping with the overall attitude."

The comments underscored the enormous generational gulf between the two men -- a contest between them would represent the largest age gap between two presidential candidates in U.S. history -- but differences dating back four decades are likely to be in play regardless of the outcome of the Democratic contest.

"Cultural Politics" is a buzz word I've never seen until now, and the thought behind it is frightening. Political culture is defined as "the sum of the fundamental values, sentiments and knowledge that give form and substance to political process", but that only makes up part of a culture. Political culture is a safe, debatable part of government and is the part of a culture tied to the political process. Political culture only measures the differences between left wing, right wing, and everything in between. The broad phrase culture covers more than just civics. Wikipedia says, "anthropologists understand 'culture' to refer not only to consumption goods, but to the general processes which produce such goods and give them meaning, and to the social relationships and practices in which such objects and processes become embedded. For them, culture thus includes art, science, as well as moral systems." Therefore, I am led to assume that cultural politics is the contest between two or more distinct and separate cultures with differences in science, art, and morals. It is the idea that the election goes beyond political culture and will embody basic ideals and beliefs as political positions.

McCain argues that Obama isn't in line with American values, but who is he to determine what those values are? Cultural politics scares me because it draws that line that we all know exists between Americans. This is not generational as the article suggests, but goes deeper into ideology, tradition, and religion. The split is between those who unconditionally support an American empire and those who want moderation and peace. This unconditional support is dependent on a belief that the U.S.A. is the greatest country in the world, and that Americans deserve the best despite the methods needed to maintain this position. I've taken notice of this rift more recently. For example, one man I waited on last night told me he supports McCain because "we need to remain strong because the terrorists have a black hate in their hearts and will be coming back to get us." Somebody I know also stated that she believes that an American life is greater in value than an Arab life, and that this justifies our policies. This is the other side, the other culture. When beliefs go so deep that neither side will moderate or consider the other side, and these beliefs become political issues, then the political process breaks down away from logic and turns to emotion. Is anybody else unsettled by this? I tried my best to explain it.

Also for those who think that there is a difference between Clinton, Obama, and McCain, this video sums up the Democrat's willingness to 'totally obliterate' Iran if they show signs of threat toward Israel. Either party we vote in, we get war.

Speaking of Israel, if you didn't know they have been spying on us in the past. It's not that big of a deal, though.
Also, check this out. I knew our generation had mass protest in them..

Marijuana Vending Machines

Today the BBC reports that California will now be operating marijuana vending machines. The new vending machines will be accompanied by a security guard, and require a prescription, fingerprints, and will take your photo at the machine to make sure that it is actually the patient purchasing the medicine.

This is a great step in civil rights for those who need medicinal marijuana as a pain killer or hunger stimulant, like Angel Raich, who sued the federal government for the 1970 Controlled Substance Act, which outlaws marijuana (among other substances) in any medical. According to the BBC, Mrs. Raich's doctor, "testified that she could die if she stopped taking marijuana," but her trial, decided in March 2007, denied her the right guaranteed by California (not to mention as a human being) to medicinal marijuana.

My beef with the vending machines is the photo aspect. With prescriptions come doctor-patient confidentiality, but I doubt that the photo taken at the vending machine would be covered by such a protection. With the already established dominance of federal law on this issue (reasserted in Mrs. Raich's case), I fear that the feds have the power to obtain the photos and prosecute the customers.

It blows my mind that the American electorate continues to elect officials with a record of, and declaration to commit to future, human rights abuses. This usually takes the form of politicians opposed to medicinal marijuana use (any in general, but there no grounds to deny medicinal use), opposed to homosexual marriage, and those who want to make abortions criminal (though I usually classify that as more civil rights, most abortion discussion devolves into a winless argument).