This Blog Title Has Changed? W.T.F???

I have decided to change the title of my blog. I wasn't really happy with the whole "W.T.F." thing, it just didn't catch my ear (or my eye) very well but it was the best thing I could think of at the time. The new title comes from an interview that aired on "The Rachel Maddow Show", Nov. 11, 2010, with Jon Stewart, host of Comedy Central's "The Daily Show".

During the course of that interview Rachel asked Mr. Stewart how he sees the role of his show in the media as compared and contrasted with 'serious newscasting'. Stewart claimed a closer kinship to Jerry Seinfeld than to CNN or MSNBC and the kind of reporting that Rachel and others do. Stewart likened his role to as being, "in the stands yelling things, criticizing", putting journalists and reporters (like Rachel) "in the game". I think that Mr. Stewart underestimates his influence.

I believe it more accurate, to continue the sports metaphor, to say that the politicians and news makers are "in the game". The serious, 'hard-news', journalists, reporters and commentators (including social satirists such as Jon Stewart, Bill Maher, Stephen Colbert, among others) are the folks in broadcast booth calling the game.

The play-by-play announcer calls the mechanics of the game, the 'nuts-&-bolts' of what is happening on the field. This is the role that Brian Williams, Katie Curic, or Diane Sawyer might be equated with. The 'color commentator' is the person that gives meaning and perspective to the action on the field. They help the viewer to put together the intangibles and make the connections that might otherwise be missed by the casual fan. The two halves of the 'broadcast team' work together to bring the fan as close to the action as possible, to bring the game to life for their listeners whether they are at home watching on the T.V. machine or are in the stands at the game. I always had my little radio with me at Mariners games to listen to the late, great Dave Niehaus and the Seattle Mariners broadcast team calling the games. Quite often the Mariners were terrible and there were more people on the filed than in the stands, but Dave and 'the color guy' made it seem worth sticking around for - or at least listening to.

The news can be complicated and confusing when simply presented as a serious of facts and events. Often people are left wondering how the events covered on the evening news actually impact their lives. What does it mean to me and my life right now? This is where Jon Stewart, along with other satirists and humorists, is able to bring together the connections that are often just out of reach until someone puts it in terms that have relevance to our personal lives.

Most people that watch sports as casual fans really do need the announcers and analysts to follow the games. There are some, like me, that can watch a baseball, football or basketball game without a soundtrack and not miss a thing. There are some that only catch the scores and highlights on the news and never go to actual games. There are some people that never watch or pay attention to sports at all. This is true with respect to the news, too.

I am a self-confessed news-junkie and political nerd. I can safely say that I am not the average American in this respect. Most Americans, it seems to me, are like the folks that catch the highlights on the late news after the games have been played. Unfortunately the numbers of people that don't pay any attention at all is growing. This is a seriously dangerous situation, as it has been said, all that is required for evil to succeed in this world is for good men to do nothing.

As I see it, it is guys like me (and readers like you) that are in the stands. We go to the games, so to speak. We follow our favorite teams, we know the standings, we know how our favorite players are doing and how the playoff picture is shaping up. We are the people that read our newspapers, watch "Meet the Press", etc. We are not, as I have previously mentioned, average as it pertains to our awareness of the world around us.

I hope to make this something that will appeal to all levels of interest. It is my ultimate goal for this blog to start, and to maintain, a conversation about the issues that face our country and our world. I have started to add links to some of the blogs that I read and some of the issues that are important to me. Please feel free to comment as you read, but do remember to be respectful to individuals.

The point of this blog is to give myself an outlet for my opinions and observations, to allow me to present my 'view from the stands', so here we go and thanks for reading.

I Read The News Today...

Thirty years ago today we heard the terrible news that John Lennon had been murdered outside his New York City apartment building. It is also thirty years since my best friend Ray, he was known mostly as 'Wizard' around north Seattle, was killed by a drunk driver. We used to call ourselves "Twin Sons of Different Mothers" (even before the Dan Fogelberg and Tim Weisberg record came out in '78). I still feel that loss acutely and I miss him every day. Yesterday, December 7th, a date which will live in infamy, is also the anniversary of the death of my son, Joshua, in 1996 whom I miss as dearly. The loss that I feel right now is immense and acutely painful.

While The Beatles were the big deal when I was a kid and I liked their music, it was other bands that would capture my devotion and imagination - The Yardbirds, The Who, Led Zeppelin, and on March 27, 1976 I discovered what would become, and remains to this day, my favorite band: Rush. It is important to understand that none of what would become "my music" would have happened if John Lennon and the Beatles, had not happened first, and the Beatles would not have happened unless Elvis happened first, and Elvis would not have happened unless "The Blues" had been around first.

In fact none of the music that we know today as "Rock & Roll" would exist without the influence of American Blues. "Skiffle" was the music that inspired a young John Lennon and James "Paul" McCartney to pick up guitars in the first place. "Skiffle" is generally thought to have originated out of the early New Orleans jazz scene due in part to it's similarity to traditional "Dixieland" jazz from the early 20th century. The New Orleans influence is largely thought to be overstated however. "Skiffle" is generally thought to have derived from merging Blues with influences from western European folk music, mostly Scots-Irish throughout Appalachian areas, as well as Caribbean and western African influences from the slave markets and New Orleans famous "Congo Square" where many of these disparate influences came together. There is a common ancestry and a common heritage shared across generations, cultures and geographic boundaries. This is what music does better than almost any other form of human communication and John Lennon was better than most at speaking to our collective souls about things that still matter thirty years after an assassin's bullet took him from us.

Today is a day, at least for me, to remember and be thankful for the time that I had with the people that I miss and for the legacy that remains for all of us from those greats that have passed on. As the Righteous Brothers sang: "If there's a Rock & Roll heaven, you know they've got a hell of a band" - This is an updated cover version, very well done and an excellent video tribute to some of the greats that died too soon.

A Letter to President Obama

Here is the text of a letter I sent to the White House this morning:

***************************************************************************************

***************************************************************************************

Dear Mr. President,

I'm just one little voice out here & you have 537 voices, much louder & much closer to your ear, mostly saying, "Hooray for our side!"

However, I talk to people and I watch TV news and commentary regularly so I have some idea of what is happening. This is what you need to know, sir:

Sen. Mitch McConnell yesterday on "Meet the Press" said no taxes will go up, the GOP is claiming victory already!

Do not compromise any further on letting "The Bush Tax Cuts" expire. If the GOP really wants to play chicken, sir, go ahead & PLAY CHICKEN with them. Even if you lose, which you most likely wouldn't, you will have been seen by your key supporters (people like me that you will need in 2012, so will every Democrat running in 2012, BTW) as having actually fought for something. As it is, most people I have talked to say that they feel disappointed because you tend to give away important bargaining chips before the negotiations even began – the “Public Option” & “DADT” are typically mentioned.

If the Democratic Party can find a backbone somewhere I think you ought to use it to stand up to the GOP and force “The Bush Tax Cuts” (have you noticed how that's now “the current tax rates” when referred to by the GOP?) to expire. Then come back in the next session & get a better deal for the middle class and small businesses.

Make the GOP go to the American people that elected them and make their case for the richest 2% - most of whom make more in a week than many (most?) Americans do in a year. I just read that the 74 people who had the highest incomes in 2009 made more than all 19 million people that make up the lowest income levels combined. This who the GOP thinks needs a tax break? Really, sir, you can’t figure out how to stand up to this? I gotta believe that the most inspirational Politician in my lifetime, since “Bobby” in ’68, can rally public support for making millionaires pay another 4.6% - for someone making $20,000 per WEEK that ain’t much. My family and I live on far less than $46,000 per year so no millionaire can tell me that they cannot make ends meet without that extra $46K.

If you want us to believe, Mr. President, you have to give us something to believe in. This is a fight you will win, if you stand up for the middle-class we will stand with you. If the money-men win this one, they will win the country and we end up right back where the "Regan-to-Bush II Years" put us.

Never give up, never surrender! (Galaxy Quest)

*******************************************************************************************

I would encourage anyone that gives a damn to do the same. I am sending copies to Sen. Murray and Cantwell as well as to the majority leadership in Congress - yes, that is still the Democratic Party until January 2011. Feel free to copy and adapt what I wrote, if you wish.

Taxing "The Rich" vs "Don't Raise Taxes On Anyone"

Yesterday morning, Saturday December 4, 2010, I was up watching the television news channels - I am typically up and around by 5:00 am or so everyday - so I was able to get the "Breaking News" update live from CNN and MSNBC that the votes in the U.S. Senate which would extend the current tax rates for incomes below $250,000 ($500K for couples) or $1,000,000 in the proposal from Sen. Charles "Chuck" Schumer (D-NY) failed as was widely expected. The votes were mostly along party lines however there were also 5 Democratic members who voted with the Republicans to raise taxes on everyone if the richest 2% don't get to keep their 4.6% tax cut, too.

The arguments were pretty clear from the outset on this:

The Republicans say, "Don't raise taxes on ANYONE in a recession, period!"

The Democratic Party's argument goes something like this:

"For the last 30 years, since the beginning of "Reganomics" or the "Trickle-Down" theory*, the wealthiest Americans, the top 2% - whose adjusted gross income (AGI) is at or above $250,000 per year - have received an abundance of the benefit of economic policies which have now created a huge problem for the other 98% of Americans and, by virtue of the fact that the US dollar (USD) is the default currency of the entire planet that 'problem' extends far beyond our geographic borders.

The cost of extending "The Bush Tax Cuts" for the top 2% of wage earners is about $700 Billion over 10 years. Because we are already in debt 'up-to-our-eyeballs', and deficit spending is at record levels, we'd have to borrow that $700 Billion, probably from China, and we just cannot afford to keep up this pretense of borrowing ourselves into prosperity. The rich have gotten richer and the poor have gotten poorer - the middle-class hardly kept up with inflation and stayed about the same in financial terms but the number of families within the middle-class went down, quite literally, into the poverty levels."

The Democratic Party argument goes on to explain how the deregulation of the financial and other industries, driven by "Reganomics", perpetuated by the Clinton administration and codified by the 2nd Bush administration, has moved America from the leader and envy of the world in just about every respect - education, innovation, technology, you name it and America was, or was thought to be, the best at it. America was called "The Land of Opportunity" by those, like my parents, who came to America in the 1940's & '50's.

Now America is something like 12th in college graduation and falling, 37th (according to the W.H.O.) in health care and falling, 46th in infant mortality, and these are only a few of the places where America is falling behind where we used to lead the way. The answers are not easy and they "require hard choices" and "sacrifice" if we are going to get back to the principles that got America to the top in the first place.

More tax cuts for the top 2% is just insane, on so many levels. We just cannot afford the $4 Trillion price tag of the "Bush Tax Cuts", but the "bottom 98%" could not absorb the brunt of the impact from an across the board tax increase. The overwhelming majority of whom make less than $100,000 per year (less than half of what the lowest earners in the top 2% earn annually) and have far less than $3.5 Million in net worth (the lowest level that is effected by the estate or 'death' tax).

So what is proposed is to extend the "Bush Tax Cuts" - what the Republicans are now referring to as "the current tax rates" - for the 98% of American families that earn less than $250,000 per year and let them expire for the top 2%, incomes over $250,000 would revert back to the 2000 tax rate of 39.6% from the current 35%.

In terms of dollars and cents, here is an example:

Let's say that a person makes $260,000 in 2010. That is just about the bottom of the infamous top 2% of incomes and it gives us some easy numbers to use as a practical example of what this actually means in real numbers.

If the rates go back to the 2000 rates of 39.6% on and a "taxable income" of $260,000 that would be a tax bill of $102,960 leaving an after-tax-income of $157,040. If however, the tax rate on that same $260,000 is only 35% the resulting tax bill would be reduced to $91,000 with a net after-tax-income of $169,000. That is a net difference of $11,960 or a difference of just over 2 weeks of income - $260,000 per year equals $5,000 per week! Most Americans don't get $5,000 per month let alone $5,000 per week!

As you can see by the strength of their argument that the Democratic Party has the right idea and is pretty much right on about what they are saying. Well, actually you could if you were able to accurately comprehend what they were telling you, which most Americans seem unable or unwilling to even attempt. Most Americans are sheep, to lazy and to stupid to see that they are being lead to the slaughter by the "Industrial-Corporate-Military-Congressional Complex". If the people don't get their collective heads on straight this nation is done as a world power and this is not a good thing for the prospects of liberty as a world goal.

Pres. Obama has said that he is hoping for compromise on the tax issue. This morning (Sunday 12/5/2010) Sen. Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) told David Gregory on "Meet The Press" "It isn't going to happen. All the Republicans and 5 Democrats voted against raising taxes on anyone during a recession." It seems to me that Sen. McConnell and the GOP are willing to stand on their belief that the Democrats in congress will blink first and be too afraid of the tax rates going up for everyone that they'll give-in on the "tax the rich" strategy without getting anything meaningful in return from the Republicans.

If that doesn't bother you you're not paying attention. If it does bother you:

GOOD! YOU SHOULD BE BOTHERED! Now go and do something about it!

Write your Senators and Representatives in Washington, D.C. and tell them that you do not want an additional $700 Billion heaped on the backs of your kids and grandkids just so the fat-cats can keep hording larger and larger portions of the wealth in America. We do not need, want, nor could we withstand, another "Gilded Age" in America.

*More properly called "Supply-Side" economic theory, it basically states that when the wealthy gain in prosperity it will "trickle down" to the rest of society because the rich will spend their additional wealth on goods and services that are provided by the lower financial classes so that everyone will get a benefit. Add the fact that typically it is the wealthiest classes (the top 2% of incomes) that own the majority of the business interests in America, so they will reinvest some of the additional profits into their businesses and thus create more jobs and, again, everyone wins because the net effect is that a rising tide lifts all boats.

"A rising tided lifted all yachts, the rowboats got left behind" - Warren Buffet, appearing on ABC's "This Week with Christiane Amanpour" 11/28/2010

Medical Discrimination Toward MMJ Patients

I am looking for a primary care doctor and as a Washington state DSHS client there are limited options within our state's Medicaid system. I was finally able to get an appointment at Pacific Medical's (PacMed) Northgate clinic with a doctor that is accepting Medicaid patients and I was able to be seen the following afternoon, less than 24 hours hence. I was thrilled and quite frankly impressed at the excellence of the service provided the person on the phone that took my information and set the appointment.

My expectations were shattered that following afternoon. It seems that when I was referred to a PacMed specialist, by a former doctor, the fact that I am a "marijuana user' was included in the referring documentation. The doctor asked me if I still used marijuana before I brought it up, so being honest, I explained that I have had a medical recommendation for the use of marijuana for 2-3 years and that I use marijuana for the relief of nausea, and other G.I. distress, that had worsened as well as becoming chronic, after I had a Gastric-By-Pass operation. I explained that this condition is not relieved by any other method, at least not without side-effects that are at times worse than the condition itself and altogether unwanted in any case.

The doctor had been reading my chart and the notes when I started talking but as soon as it hit his brain that I was saying that I am a "medical marijuana user" he set my chart down on the desk and closed it while he politely listened as I finished my explanation.

Then he said that he had to inform me, "that the clinic has a policy" regarding "marijuana users", without respect to medical vs. recreational use, which states that they absolutely will not prescribe any medications which the clinic lists as addictive or which the clinic determines has a high potential for abuse to people who use marijuana. He would be specifically prevented from prescribing any narcotic pain medication such as Vicodin - whether he felt it appropriate or not - by corporate fiat. I think he added that last bit about the narcotic pain medications because one of my main issues - after the nausea and PTSD/Depression issues - has been severe and chronic pain. He would need to get all my medical records and a UA/Drug Screen before he would be able to prescribe ANY medications at all so I should contact my prior provider for any refills I may need until he can get all the information.

I realized that I was being told that I am a drug addict and was going to be treated like one. So, I asked the doctor this question: "Does this policy apply alcohol &/or tobacco users?" I should surprise absolutely nobody that the answer was, with a hint of humor in it, "No." So, I took it one step further, I asked: "Does this clinic or PacMed as a whole, have a similar policy regarding the treatment of a patient that a doctor knows, or reasonably suspects, is an alcoholic or addicted to nicotine?" Again the answer was, no. At least for the second question he added the qualifier that he wasn't aware of one, he'd have to check. I told him that I was 99.99999% sure that there wasn't and I still stand by that belief.

So, what this comes down to is this: If you use a legal medicine for a condition and that medicine is effective for the condition for which you use it, and they (PacMed) don't approve of that particular medicine, they will not allow their doctors to treat you as anything other than an addict until you prove you are not an addict by quitting the medicine (otherwise legal and effective) that they don't like. If I'd just quit "smoking pot" then I can get Vicodin and Oxy-whatever-I-want. This is silly on it's face as well as being discrimination against medical marijuana users.

I have contacted the Washington State office of the ACLU and they have given me a few resources to investigate and I am looking for a good lawyer to see about bringing a discrimination suit against PacMed. What I would tell every medical marijuana patient is get your complete medical records, including doctors notes and referral notes, to see what information is being shared among your medical providers. You may be branded as an addict or a drug-seeker and you don't know it. You may not be getting your doctors best medical decisions because of a policy that you don't realize is affecting your doctors ability to determine and implement a course of treatment.

I will be doing some more research on this and writing about my experiences here on my blog and I'll be sharing these with Steve over at Toke of the Town and with the good folks over at Northwest Leaf as well as anywhere else that will listen. This is discrimination, plain and simple, and it, as will all prejudice and discrimination, must not go unchallenged. We, the MMJ community, deserve to be treated as patients. We do not deserve to be treated as though every marijuana user is a drug-addict, if for no other reason than the fact that it is just not true.

Supporting The Troops? I Think Not, Pastor Jones!

Pastor Terry Jones of the Dove World Outreach Center (Gainesville, Florida, USA) is still determined to go ahead with "International Burn A Koran Day" this Saturday 11-Sept-2010. Here is the email I sent via his Dove World Outreach Center web site:

Please, Please, please do not go through with your "Burn A Koran Day". I am just an American up in Seattle, WA and I can't do anything to stop you, nor should I be able to stop you even if I could, you have every right to burn whatever books you want. This is, after all, America. But that is the point, isn't it? This IS America and we ought to be better than those that burn books which might contain 'threatening ideas' or forbid 'special knowledge' that is too dangerous for public distribution. This is what tyrannical society does to it's citizens, not what any American ought to be emulating.

I hope that you will not do this thing. It will, without question, be used as a 'marketing tool' to prove that this war is, indeed, not a "War On Terror" at all but a direct attack by the "Infidel West" on Islam itself. By burning Korans in a public demonstration, and publicly suggesting that others to do the same in an internationally coordinated protest WILL, not might, not probably but definitely will cost the lives of Americans in harm's way. The blood of those brave soldiers will be on your hands. This is as certain as the sun rising in the east, count on it.

Jesus, were he the god you claim him to be, would tell you to your faces that you are no representative of his or his fathers. Your holy book, the bible, says in Luke 6:27-36 that Jesus' teaching is to LOVE YOUR ENEMIES, look it up, really it is in there, I'm not kidding. So, you are clearly defying what you will say is the "unfailing and holy word of god, perfect in form and fact".

If you have a "Christlike Nature" you cannot justify an act that you already know will enrage your 'enemy'. Antagonism is not a "Christian" trait, is it?

You have been asked by many in America to stand down your demonstration. You have heard, I suppose, Gen. Petraeus basically pleading for you to not do this, you know that Sec. of State Clinton has asked that you not do this, and now you hear from an ordinary American who loves his country and what this nation is supposed to represent to the rest of the world. If you burn korans as you say you plan to, you will be doing more to help the radical Muslim factions around the world than anything they could every buy with all the money in the world. You are proving their case that this is a "Christianity v. Islam" fight. Please let reason reign in this instance and demonstrate the meaning of the phrase, "Grace Under Pressure".

Respectfully,

J. A. Burleigh

I don't think he'll change his plans, but that is up to him.

Hempfest 2010

As I was visiting with the Sensible Washington folks at their booth during HempFest this year I was slightly surprised and extremely disappointed in the apparent lack of interest in actually doing something tangible toward reformation of the marijuana laws in Washington State, or anywhere else for that matter. People just walked on by not bothering to signup for anything, even e-mails about the marijuana laws. What are these people thinking? I often hear people saying, “Somebody ought to do something…”, but rarely do I hear anyone saying “How can I help?” It seems like it’s always up to somebody else. How would it be if more people stopped waiting for someone else to do something and became determined to be that someone they have been waiting for?

It seems to me that if there is going to be a serious effort to make real change in the legality of medical marijuana and the distribution of medical marijuana through legal, safe and licensed dispensaries then we, the medical marijuana community, must be the ones who start to forge a new reality, closer to the heart (that is your gratuitous RUSH reference for the day). It will take the concentrated effort of dedicated volunteers to bring about the changes that we seek in the drug laws, and it will not be an easy sell to the general electorate by any stretch. This is going to take time and it’s going to take money and it’s going to be done is steps, not all in one go.

I think that part of the issue with the previous effort is that it went too far, too quickly, for many voters in Washington. Legal “medical” usage and distribution based upon state laws in Washington, along with the other medical marijuana states, will be the first steps toward the ultimate goal of making marijuana as legal as liquor and tobacco products are today.

It is my belief that there is a greater need at this time than trying to make marijuana completely legal, and also will be more likely to enjoy a broader range of support from those opposed to outright legalization. Our greatest need at this time is the establishment of a codified dispensary system in Washington State. There are dozens of “provider dispensaries” in operation within the Puget Sound area and many more in other parts of the state. The problem is that they all operate more or less autonomously and since there are no laws or guidelines for dispensary operation it is difficult for patients (and the dispensaries) to protect themselves and stay within the ‘spirit of the law’ as there is currently no ‘letter of the law’ with respect to dispensaries and safe methods of obtaining medical marijuana. A straight forward set of operational parameters that apply to every dispensary will make it easier to open a dispensary if one wished to do so and easier for patients to establish themselves with dispensaries.

While nobody really likes the idea of taxation and regulation, it is unreasonable to expect that any of this going to happen without the government getting their piece of the pie, so to speak. In reality government regulation is not entirely a bad thing. Yes, it will bring about taxation of marijuana and the dispensaries will be required to obtain licensing that will involve fees and regulations. This is what every single business in this state has to deal with so it is silly to expect that the marijuana business is going to get a free pass from the state. We need to have a seat at that table, folks! We need to have a voice in that discussion so that we, the marijuana community, can work within the establishment of government to create the laws, set the tax and fee rates, and determine where the revenue generated by our tax dollars gets used.

There is one major item that MUST get changed before any of this will be seen as legitimate by the general public. Marijuana must be moved off of the DEA’s Schedule 1. Aside from just being stupid, having marijuana classified in the same category as Heroine, it is necessary for marijuana to be re-scheduled in order to eliminate the threat from Federal authorities and allow medical professionals to prescribe/recommend marijuana without fear of losing their DEA license to write prescriptions. These is a measure in the US House of Representatives that will do exactly that, it was introduced by Rep. Barney Frank (D MA-4th) and is currently sitting in committee. I have written a letter of support for this measure to Rep. Frank and also to every member of the House Energy & Commerce Committee, I encourage everyone interested in the furtherance of the medical marijuana cause to do the same.