I'm with you on this one.

Precisely. This is all perfectly simple and logical, so what was it that compelled Teach to begin with a barbed caricature of people who essentially feel exactly as he does? We keep seeing this kind of thing lately and I'm still trying to understand it.

The answer may be that we've reached a strange moment where the strength of our argument has outpaced the resolution of the cultural and political associations people attach to marijuana use. In other words, conservatives like Glenn Beck and the folks at Stop The ACLU might simultaneously agree that the war on marijuana is stupid, while also maintaining some animosity towards the stereotypical liberal hippie types that they generally identify the issue with.

I think your assessment is pretty close to the reality. While I am frustrated by the terrible level of dialog by guys like Glen Beck, let's be fair: Hate and contempt are their gimmick. Their popularity is based on ridiculing and heaping contempt on anyone who doesn't toe their line. Generally it's easier to attack someone else's position than to defend one's own. That's particularly true when one has poorly thought out opinions based primarily on emotional reactions.

I think it must be very conflicting for them. I think the cognitive dischord goes something like this:

1. Their politics and decisions are based on a sense of tribalism. Us vs. them.
2. Drug legalisation == soft on crime
3. soft on crime == liberal hippy types
4. Marijuana == hippie drug
5. Reagan == our generations prototypical drug warrior

But as soon as you start applying any of the concepts that they claim to care about: individual liberty, constitutional law, states rights, they have to question the standard Republican line. Add to that the fact that Marijuana is vastly less harmful than tolerated drugs, and the fact that they have all had experiences with grass and turned into the fine upstanding conservatives that they are, they have a hard time spewing the drug warrior line.

So they come out saying they are against the drug war, but they don't want to be lumped together with a bunch of hippies and liberals, or thought of as pot heads themselves. So they start out by abusing hippies, liberals and potheads before going on to say that yes indeed, our drug laws are harmful

So yeah, I think it's awesome. I see it as an unavoidable stage in the development. At least now many popular conservative pundits are willing to come out and oppose drug prohibition (conservative intellectuals have always been against prohibition). Hopefully in time they will be able to do so with more appropriately directed rancor.

As an aside, I think the internet is a major factor in the dramatic shift we are seeing in drug policies. The prohibitionists have used censorship and propaganda very effectively in the past, and it was difficult to convince people of the facts. The internet has made medical and social research, i.e. the facts in the issues, freely available, which makes it much easier to call bullshit on people.

www.glenstark.net

I think he's down to one. There are many compelling reasons to end prohibition. The only reason to continue it is to protect the careers of politicians and law enforcers who make their livings endangering and abusing the people they are elected to serve and sworn to protect.

I wrote to the ACLU once about the illegal general search warrants and no-knock entries used by drug police and was informed that they only get involved when the US Constitution is being violated. Then when the Patriot Act was passed, the ACLU wanted me to get involved in their "protect the Fourth Amendment" campaign. If and when freedom and privacy are legalized, I don't believe it will be thanks to the ACLU.

@ Scott, … so what was it that compelled Teach to begin with a barbed caricature of people who essentially feel exactly as he does? We keep seeing this kind of thing lately and I'm still trying to understand it.

That's why it's so hard for me to understand why people who ostensibly agree with our case nonetheless endeavor to turn this into something silly or frivolous.

Ahh, sooo gwasshoppa. :-)

Now open your Bibles and let us turn to … :-)

These people care more about the "praise of man" (aka peer pressure) than "praise of God." (truth)

Also put this way, they are afraid of humans more than they are afraid of God.

Perhaps also they know the derision they've poured out on others with regard to this issue and don't want to see it come back to them, thus they always begin with a caveat disclaimer, or some kind of put-down. But then try to end magnanimously.

Also, how one has used it in the past reflects on one's current perspective. This is why, I believe, I am attacked by some religious people who want to shout, "devil weed" when I tell them marijuana can be used for religious purposes. Perhaps this is the category S. Baldwin falls into.

They didn't start using marijuana while they were "believers." They started using marijuana while they were party animals living for every pleasure they could find, drinking lots of alcohol, and doing all sorts of things they now regret.

So like Pavlovian dogs, they have conditioned themselves to see marijuana as intrinsic to that "lifestyle."

To me this just shows that while they may have had a change of heart, their minds really haven't grown any. This is obvious, as has been pointed out here at StopTheDrugWar.org on another page, quoting S. Baldwin recently saying "only pot heads want marijuana to be legalized," just days/weeks after being thoroughly trounced by Ron Paul during a debate on this subject. And Ron Paul ain't no pot head!

They also overlook the fact that not everyone smokes/uses marijuana for its cognitive effects. For so many years they've been brainwashed, "it has no medical purpose" they have trouble seeing beyond that lie.

For some religious and non-religious perspectives, serious (short) essays and humor pieces, anyone is welcome to visit:
http://ChristiansAgainstProhibition.org/
(Currently running on woefully under-powered shared hosting, so be patient. :-)

Glenn Beck’s multi-faceted career has had its twists and turns, including a stint involving alcohol and drug use during what he describes in his biography as a “lost decade” where among other things he claims to have snorted lines of cocaine off the bare buttock-cheeks of pole dancers.