Twenty years ago the state in which I reside placed a measure before the voters concerning the legalization of a marijuana. It was soundly defeated. Something like 10:1. Months before the elections a handful of people were going from county fair to county fair trying to drum up support for the measure. Their very appearance was a turn off to the average American. Dirty clothes, unshaven, long hair, unkempt beards on the men, and often giving the appearance of someone stoned. No one stopped to listen except others of similar ilk.

These rumblings of legalization did not go unnoticed in Washington, D.C. This is the Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988. Looking at sub:5011. “The Congress finds that legalization of illegal drugs, on the Federal or State level, is an unconscionable surrender in a war in which, for the future of our country and the lives of our children, there can be no substitute for total victory”. Looking further down, at sub:5252-B, “It is the declared policy of the United States to create a Drug-Free America by 1995".

Twenty years on and many cannot see any tangible progress in what seems to be a failing war on drugs. In spite of billion dollar, multi-departmental efforts; the availability of drugs increases. Billions of dollars are spent annually in the chase for an enemy more elusive than Usama.

Twenty years on and the ideological battle continues, but no ideological battle can be won based solely on who has the better statistics. Every side is well armed with statistics that say what they want them to say.

There are those who want to keep things the way they are and, in some cases, tighten up. To some there are several reasons for government to reduce the availability of drugs. They believe that drugs are bad for those who consume them and it is the role of government to protect us from ourselves. Much like protections from unsafe food, or possession of child pornography. They strengthen their position pointing to the tragedy of what users do to other people.

There are others who (to a more or less degree) support some variant of decriminalization. They believe government cannot, and should not, prohibit personal conduct that doesn’t hurt anyone else. Government should not be about the business of protecting people from themselves. That an individual be free to engage in the private use of a drug goes to the rights of self-determination.

An opponent of the prohibition would point out that only a few would seriously argue for the criminalization of alcohol and tobacco. Yet alcohol is far and away the drug most associated with crime and violence both social and domestic. Impacts surrounding tobacco are well documented. At it’s core, drug use, legal and illegal, is a health problem and should be out in the open; allowing for treatment and education. Prohibition often drives the user underground and anonymous. Problematic drug use should be accepted as inevitable, but limited and manageable.

The legal system is filled with drug cases that solve nothing. The usual suspects are mules that have no information to share and rely on an overworked public defender. Prisons are filled with mules, low level dealers and users. The kingpins can afford the best of legal defenses and spend most of their pre-trial time cutting deals. The prisons are not filled with the kingpins.

The legalization of an illegal drug would expose it’s profits to substantial taxation. $5,000 of drug money invested at the source can bring as much as $100,000 by the time it filters down to the streets. That’s a 20,000 % return and it’s tax free. It’s the prohibition that allows it. The government has never been shy about taxing the wages of sin. The tax free billions of drug kingpins would, instead, enter the mainstream economy and the flow of taxable income. Newly found revenues could be earmarked for law enforcement and education at both Federal and State levels

The most complete and succinct close would be the words of Judge Martin Haines', writing in the New Jersey Law Journal. “The decades-long indoctrination of the public in the need for a drug war as the only solution to the very serious problem of drugs has had serious consequences. It has prevented the consideration of any clearly necessary, intelligent alternative to a war that has not worked. Few public officials dare to advance alternatives. Doing so threatens the loss of the next election, or the next appointment.

There is a mountain of conflicting evidence and views about the course to be taken. This demonstrates the imperative need for an objective multidisciplinary study to independently assess the facts, and recommend courses of conduct to be followed. This study should be carried out by a commission that is bipartisan, is appointed jointly by Congress and the Executive, and is composed of persons of unquestioned prestige. (Needless to say, this presidential election year is not the time for any such inquiry.) As part of this process there must be a truly national debate about this subject to create conscience and consensus about these problems. Most important, there is a need to keep an open mind about these issues".
”

The White House, and it’s occupant, are complaining. They believe that the media spends so much time talking about Iraqi civil war, and Abramoff’s stipends, and Haliburton, and the mute veep, and the hunt for bin Laden, and Katrina, and FEMA’s uninhabited trailer park, and dickshot, and portgate; that there is no significant coverage given to the occupant’s domestic policies.

Usually, faced with a lack of support (which is also usually), the occupant heads for the choir and starts preaching. He preaches to the VFW about treating the military better. He preaches to young people about the pending collapse of Social Security. He preaches to the military academy about the war on terror. He preaches to the NIA about wiretapping. He preaches Medicare D at the old folks home. He preaches to the Border Patrol about securing the borders.

He tells the Border Patrol Officers that help is on the way. The usual lip service (e.g more money, more hiring, increased wages, newer vehicles, etc.), but he also reminds them that there are certain illegal aliens that are untouchables. That would be those who have been renamed temporary workers or day workers. These people are vital, yes vital, to the economy of the United States.

These people, that come and go at their leisure, are willing to do the jobs that Americans won’t do. The preacher even sympathizes with illegal aliens, oops! I mean temporary workers, saying that if he were an unemployed Mexican trying to feed his family that he, too, would cross the border, albeit illegally. The preacher seems to care more about an unemployed Mexican trying to feed his family and less about an unemployed American trying to do the same thing.

Are they really jobs that Americans won’t do? I got the impression that without temporary workers helping out a head of lettuce could cost as much as $5.00. If that’s true, then saying these are jobs Americans won’t do; isn’t true. These are jobs that Mr. Lettuce wants done on the cheap. Mr. Lettuce avoids paying a decent wage, a little insurance and workman’s compensation contributions, justifying it all by holding a head of lettuce over my head.

Underneath it all, Mr. Lettuce knows that Americans won’t buy lettuce at $5.00. When that day comes, he is done. But with all these temporary workers his business is protected. The preacher knows that these temporary workers add to the crime rate while subtracting from the Medicaid pool but he is always one to prop up small businesses.

As the preacher preaches, one can look past him to the other side of the Rio Grande and see quite a few American factories up and running in Mexico. Well, Preacher, aren’t there jobs over there that Americans would do? Never mind that! Today’s sermon is about securing the border, not outsourcing. Now the preacher has me all confused. He’s telling me about jobs Americans won’t do and I’m looking across the river at jobs Americans can’t have.

A new posting will be placed at all border crossings. It will list current positions available for jobs Americans won’t do. Temporary workers can pick and choose from a smorgasbord of openings.

1. Pick artichokes in California’s Salinas Valley
2. Pick apples in Oregon’s Hood River Orchards
3. Make beds and sweep floors in San Diego’s finer hotels
4. Keep house for most any politician in Washington, D.C.
5. Assume day to day operations of America’s 6 largest shipping ports.

Did you know there were so many jobs Americans won’t do?

Stand Down!, you lunatic, fanatic, unpatriotic, hysterical, naysaying, lefties. Stand Down! The President of the United States of America has told you that White House Intelligence has given the U.A.E. a clean bill of health. You remember the White House Intelligence crowd, don’t you?, they of WMD slam-dunking fame.

Just the name United Arab Emirates sounds scary to me, but the President of the United States tells me they are our friends. As the Sa’ud leadership slips deeper into coma the United States needs a more coherent friend to scour the oil fields. Looks as though the U.A.E. is it. They can replace Yemen which was our friend until they hosted the USS Cole event, only later to allow the perpetrators to escape.

Iraq was our friend as well. The United States hated Iran and when Iraq waged war the United States had a new friend. Iraq stayed friends with the United States until it wanted to invade Kuwait. Then Iraq wasn’t our friend any more. But that was okay because Afghanistan wanted to be our friend.

They, and bin Laden, were guerillas in the mist holding back a Soviet surge. The United States was more than happy to bankroll any country wanting to give those Ruskies a butt whippin’. It was a triumvirate made by God/Allah. Afghanistan, bin Laden and the United States, skipping the hills of Tora Bora, and all they were saying was give peace a chance.

But Afghanistan is remote and backward. It could never replace our friend before them. Iran was our good friend and a difficult act to follow. The Shah was a shamelessly opulent Westerner who could, singlehandedly, stave off the media while assuaging the masses. The masses had finally stood all the assuaging they were going to stand and the fundamentalist tossed out both the despot and the friendship. In all cultures, fundamentalists are to be feared.

The U.A.E. is just the latest name added to the dancecard. The President of the United States and his Intelligence Bureau have assured me that the United Arab Emirates are our friends. The Friends of the United States list is a long one; etched in pencil.

I was shuffling through some papers over at Moody’s Jerk Store and it got me to thinking about how regular folks could make a difference.

imagine... Everybody started planning a summer vacation at home? Why not use this year to seek out and enjoy your immediate surroundings. Don’t shell out for 300 gallons of gas just to get the clan in and out of Yellowstone or Disneyland. If you have to do that stuff, do it next year. Believe me, they will still be there. But this year stay close to home. You want to be heard in the boardrooms? Hit them in the wallet. It’s the only thing that hurts.

imagine... From June 2006 until May 2007 nobody buy a new car, truck, whatever. Everyone could still fiddle around with used cars but nothing new. Make your plans. If a new car is in your future, do it before June ‘06 or after May ‘07. You want to be heard in the boardrooms? Hit them in the wallet. It’s the only thing that hurts.

imagine... putting Christmas back into December. Everybody makes it clear to retailers that if they (retailers) put up any Christmas decorations before December 1st no one will shop there. No one, and it doesn’t matter what size or type of store. You want to be heard in the boardrooms? Hit them in the wallet. It’s the only thing that hurts.

Regular people could get a lot done, if we would. But we’re busy.

imagine...

The “war” in Iraq is going the wrong direction. The “war” against terrorism is going the wrong direction. The reason for these misdirected “wars” is that the premises of the “combatants” are different. The Coalition Forces are hellbent on securing Iraq at the end of a gun barrel. The “war” against terrorism, which always seems to winnow to the United States, is waged through espionage , wiretaps and the like.

The light at the end of the coalition’s tunnel is in sight and has been for many years. Their problem is not knowing whether they are nearing the light or if they still must go deeper into the tunnel. The light at the end of the tunnel from a “war” on terror perspective doesn’t exist. Even the most optimistic among us agree that the “war” against terrorism will never end.

So what inspires these resisters? What inspires a human to explode him or herself? What is the goal of roadside I.E.D.’s and hostage taking? The inspiration in every case is the imprint of Western culture on Muslim soil. That is a matter of small consequence to we within the coalition. It is a matter of upmost importance to Muslims.

When the USS Cole was attacked it wasn’t the desire of the attackers to scuttle some hunk of metal to the bottom of the bay. What use would al-Qaeda have for a tin can with a gaping hole in it’s side? The message was get your feet off our land. The London bombings were not a signal for Muslims to invade England. And what use would al-Qaeda have for a blown apart subway system? The message was get your feet off our land. In the days following 9/11 Ben Laden never once said it was his desire to take all the gold, overrun New York and possess all the Ipods.
The message was get your feet off our land.

In every interview and video and tape ever released the message has been the same. I have yet to hear “we want everything”, more often I hear we want only for you to get your feet off our land. It turns out that these “wars” in Iraq and against terror are pitting the politically fed against the religiously fed. Politics come and go. Religion endures. It’s like the lackluster, financially set NBA versus the rabid zealots of the hungry NCAA. It’s the sated Knicks visiting the Duke fanatics.

The approach to a solution to the current imbroglio in Iraq, and the implied terror activities, lay not within the realm of diplomacy. The answers lie within understanding the Muslims and their beliefs. It’s never mentioned. All we hear is more troops, more bombs, more wiretaps, more dollars, more suffering on every side. Money well spent would be money spent educating the coalesced countries as to what motivates people we perceive as screaming lunatics. Rather than shooting The Messenger we would be better served by understanding the message.