May 5th 2009 - Tuesday
Topic: "Should the economy go to pot?" Thom spars with Dan Gainor of the Business and Media Institute www.businessandmedia.org
Topic: How can republicans continue to defend corporate tax cheating? Thom and Dan Gainor (www.cei.org) debate
Topic: "The Global Deal: Climate Change and the Creation of a New Era of Progress and Prosperity" Thom talks with world renowned economist Lord Nicholas Stern about the costs/benefits of dealing with global warming www.sternreview.org.uk
On your going to Pot Topic, I strongly believe marijuana should be legalized with controlled distribution through taxed outlets, similar to many states ABC stores.
Besides keeping pot out of the hands of children, legalization wll break the cycle of disenfranchisement of minorities - the original target of marijuana legislation - by stopping the attitude of "I like pot, this makes me a criminal, since I'm a criminal, I will commit other crimes too." We will be a safer and saner nation.
Another start of the day with paid lobbist, he gets paid to spew the talking points, if he really believes it or not. It's like asking a car selesman about what brand of car to buy (along with the model, and needed accessories- the more it cost, the more he will tell you that you need it). Visiting his Website only promotes his agenda and his paycheck.
The only thing is type of debate (??) does is promote a discussion which is OK, but don't promote Dan Gainor and his ilk. They need to be sent to obscurity like the neolithic thinking of the past.-Expose them, do a Bio- education, employment history and benafactors.
"Marijuana is a gateway drug," says Jared Followill, "It leads to sweat-pants and Cheetos." (Rolling Stone) April 30 2009 Everyone has addictions. We trade them hopefully for less harmfull ones. I gave up booze, cigs, LSD, and a few more for a little Delta 9 Tetra-hydro-cannibanol. It's a great pain releiver and it's as good as a dozen beers. The drug should be treated just like alcohol. I'm pretty sure I'm much better off than doing all of the other more harmfull ones. Thom, I roll my joints with filters, I roll with a bill and slide the filter in just ahead of the paper. It smooths out the smoke and you don"t loose much THC. Take the little bit of weed remaining and save it for your pipe. It's chamber weed. Great show. Dave from MN.
I was a Toastmaster in the 90's and would occasionally debate others on various topics. One of the topics I did research on was on the drinking age and prohibition in general. When comparing the various countries, with only one exception (Iceland), the more stringent the restrictions, the higher the rate of alcoholism.
I know the Mormon church was banned from posthumously baptizing people but can't find the link. This is a common practice of the church that has pissed off a lot of people. If someone didn't chose the Mormon church while alive - they aren't going to change their minds once they are dead!
The general mentality of this nation is "If it feels good, make it illegal unless money can be made off it."
I'm a liberal and a practicing Mormon. I need to correct one thing you said about Barack's mother and Lore's claim as well.
1) Mormons do not believe that Barack's mother is now a Mormon. We do believe that people can choose to become Mormons (or other religions, too) after they are dead.
2) We believe that physical baptism is required to enter heaven. Because we do not know who has chosen to join our church after they have passed, we perform vicarious baptisms for all that we can. The individual is free to accept or reject that ordinance. They are not added to the church's roles as a "member".
3) There have been many objections over the years to the practice. Out of respect for living relatives, the church asks that people who perform the ordinances get permission from the nearest living relative. I had heard (but am unable to find a place to confirm is) that the church does not do Temple Work for unrelated individuals unless he/she passed away 50 years or more ago.
4) This practice is not meant to offend anyone - to my knowledge, Mormonism is the only Christian denomination that gives everyone who has ever lived an equal chance to go to heaven. You can disagree with the theology, but the fact is that whether you were a Zoroastrian or an Aborigine thousands of years before Jesus lived, in Mormon theology you have an equal chance at salvation as anyone who lives today. Most of Christianity doesn't give you that hope or that chance.
Is this what the Tea Parties are all about? Are the protestors angry they aren't paying 2.3 % like these corporations :) Do they even care?
Note to self - let Mormon cousins know that I do not to be baptized Mormon after I die. I could be a Mormon now if I wanted to. I do not. Ask them to support my wishes while alive after I am dead!
Thom, "specie" means "cash". You mean "species" which functions as both singular and plural, just like "series".
Thom is wrong about the composition of the Federal Reserve. The President appoints all of the 7 Governors who are on the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. They serve in 14 year staggered terms after the president appoints them with the advice and consent of the Senate. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman serve 7 year terms, again the President appoints them with the advice and consent of the Senate. Now...the kicker is this: while cabinet officials serve at the pleasure of the President, the President can only fire a Governor for "cause." This essentially means for intentionally mal or misfeasance. The 11 member banks are private banks completely unaccountable to anyone, in law and in fact. The Board of Governors is completely unaccountable not so much in law as in fact.
Tom the problem with America is TV EX: I kill all of my neighbors and it is never showen on TV---the killing in this country never happen .
ex2 the TV says that Nixon was the devil Nixon becomes the devil.
TV is the brain for our follow Americans to change things progressive have to own TV stations or change will not happen if it ant on TV it ant real...
I think legalization of pot is a positive step the United States would benefit from. Though I have used it infrequently, I have found it to be a catalyst to amazing learning experiences both mental and physical. Making pot legal would create a taxible industry that would make available all the variations of pot that exist accessible for people like me with strengths that are predictable. The few negative experiences I had with pot was getting too much in my system causing paranoia, or having some negative side effects that lasted way too long such as a headache, sleepiness or sleeplessness.
In my opinion, the only reason pot is illegal is because it leads to social awareness allowing people to recognize how to protect themselves from being conned. Who in a powerful position wants pot to be illegal? What is their agenda?
Massachusetts as of Jan. 1 decriminalized possession of less than an ounce of pot. It's now a civil offense that carries a $100 fine.
I'm new to the site - where can I get a transcript of this show?
all the best...
It seems to me that now may be the last real opportunity the country has to make fundamental changes in the relationship between commerce and the social good, particularly in regard to health care reform; if a majority supports it, then Obama and the Democrats must strike the iron while it's hot. But even now, Senate Democrats seem ready to scrap a public option for Medicare. It is obvious why the insurance companies oppose it: in order to compete with it, they must either cut costs by cutting upper management compensation and bureaucratic red tape--which they won't do--or cutting services. Either way, they would lose.
On another topic, Thom suggestion that we need to follow China's lead in regard to monopolies is not very enlightening. Thom is smart enough to know that China's refusal to sanction private monopolies (as opposed to state-owned) has nothing to do with the economic well-being of the people, but is purely political; as in Russia, Chinese leaders fear pressure to reform and open-up its political system by the existence of a counterbalance to its own power. I also cannot but observe that while Thom likes to pick-on petty "criminals" like NAFTA and CAFTA, he is loath to take on the Big Boss--China.
I just want to point out that while Mormons did not explicitly believe that blacks were the seed of the Devil, they did believe that they were the seed of Cain, who they claimed had the "curse" of dark skin. The "third prophet" John Taylor, it should be noted, claimed that Cain and his descendants were the Devil's representatives on Earth. It was only until the 1970s that blacks were allowed to become full members of the church. In regard to the Mormon attitude toward Native Americans, that's another chapter. It is interesting to note that Mormons "explain" the prior racist attitudes by the church as "mistranslation" of the Book of Mormon.
In addressing an other issue, (legalization of all drugs). I've witnessed very smart very nice people destroyed by drug addiction. One being a family member, he overdosed on heroin and alcohol. I think he wanted to live but accidentally put himself to the edge and then over. Though this was the last time he died, it was not the first. Heroin acts as a depressant and it can stop the heart and breathing. In the case for my family member, he died three times before his last. Paramedics revived him during previous deaths, only on his last death he was in a public location. Nobody noticed his passing, they thought he was asleep. Previous deaths occurred because he got a hold of a very pure heroin which according to him was unusual. He stated distributors or producers often cut the product with other substances. He said he sold heroin for a while and added other "harmless" substances to increase his profit as well. Oddly enough his friends upon his overdoses in the past went back to the dealers who sold the strong stuff because it was a good deal.
The point is this. Drugs will never be wiped off the map. By legalizing drugs, controls can better be put on production and distribution to make sure what people are getting regardless of law, is consistent and not contaminated.
The concept of shifting funding from a war on drugs to funding treatment is an other point brought up today. An other family member also had an addiction problem with heroin and methamphetamines. Do did her significant other. There came a time when I was instrumental in getting this person into help which quite possibly saved her life. She had life threatening infections therefor the state easily accepted her into treatment. I promised my family member to help her boyfriend get into treatment as well as a condition for her to voluntarily commit. Taking on the challenge seriously, I took on the role of almost impossible measures. Getting a person into detox is very challenging. I brought this person into the UW hospital in Seattle and they would not admit him. I called Harborview and they had a waiting list. I called the Crisis Line and found a place in Everett that had a very low budgeted detox center. It was more of a house with a volunteer staff that would only take you if your detox was not life threatening, such as alcohol detox. Long story short, it took a very frustrating day to get a strung out user into a detox center. I'm sure this person would never have tried as hard as I did to get treatment, though he did want it. Unfortunately, this outfit was not equipped to deal with his psychological needs and he left the next day.
Legalize drugs and fund treatment for drug user, I agree %100.
Myself and my family have you and your family in our thoughts and prayers, and we are sorry to hear about your loss.
Look forward to the show as always, and look forward to reading your latest book.
I finally saw "The Great Debate" well done by the way.