Recent polling done by a bevy of rightwing pollsters indicates that Grandma and Grandpa are the real threat to the aims of the Republican party. Therefore, they must be dealt with accordingly.
As if taking a cue from the Scientologists, Grandma and Grandpa are now considered ‘fair game’, and as such, Republicans are in the process of treating these SP’s (suppressive person) with as much disdain and derision as any good Scientologist in a similar position.
They’ll loudly point out how useless these old farts are to our society (which Grandma and Grandpa built) and how we ought to make them carry their own weight and quit sucking out an existence on the backs of ‘honest’ hard-working folks like they imagine themselves to be.
Sometimes they disguise themselves as defenders of the poor and meek, but always in the cloak of a free enterprise solution. There’s no need for the public to fund old people on end-of-life issues. Not when the private sector has already implemented de facto death panels of their own! Just look at the millions of old folks facing insurmountable free-market health care costs who are forced to do without medicines in lieu of bread. The free market solution will work it’s magic on them soon enough without unnecessary government interference.
I fully expect the next line of Republican attacks on our seniors will require Grandma and Grandpa to provide an original US birth certificate to continue living in the country, or face immediate expulsion and confiscation of whatever meager possessions they might still be clinging to.
First a little background. I first struck up an email friendship with Peter McWilliams after reading his book “Ain’t Nobody’s Business – The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in America” many years ago. It was at a time in Peter’s life when he was very active in the medical marijuana movement, having stumbled onto the relief the drug gave him in combating the nausea brought on by his AID’s medicines. He was eventually jailed and charged for conspiracy to grow medical marijuana. This was clearly a retaliatory measure from the DEA to silence him and his inspirational message on the subject.
As part of his plea deal to avoid continued incarceration, he was forced to stop using cannabis to control his nausea or face a long prison sentence and forfeiture of bond (his mom’s house!)
His compliance with the orders of the court saved his mom’s house, but cost Peter his life. Shortly after sentencing, Peter ended up choking to death on his own vomit from the uncontrolled nausea the marijuana had previously abated. While you may never have heard of Peter, he was high profile enough to have attracted the attention of a John Stossel (on 20/20), who did a segment on his death at the hands of the police state. Peter died in 2000.
Fast forward to 2010. A person I’ve never met, a seemingly gently soul with a desire to honor Peter’s memory, sets up a Facebook tribute page on behalf of the memory of Peter. She’s been amazing in her efforts to honor Peter, going so far as to write a tribute song which has received a fair bit of radio play. She’s also working on a video to honor Peter as well. She saw one of my pro-Peter posts and invited me to join the Facebook group which I promptly did.
At the time, I was totally unaware that there were ulterior motives behind the effort. Perhaps ulterior is too dark a word. Maybe “competing interpretations of Peter’s life” would be more accurate. Peter was many things to many people. That’s not up for debate. The problem with the tribute page on Facebook is that it’s being run, not as a PUBLIC tribute (why Facebook then?), but as a repository of goodwill specifically tailored to make his mother feel better about her son. Therefore, some aspects of Peter’s politics and passion are NOT WELCOME on the page, lest it ‘upset’ the remaining members of his family. I have been chastised in private messages from the group for mentioning aspects of Peter’s work, simply because of family politics.
I can understand the desire to shield the family, but I do not agree with the idea one bit. I’ve mentioned topics that Peter wrote and spoke of loudly and proudly when he was alive. Subjects he took the time to commit to his writings and public speaking venues. Subjects that not only was he was passionate about, but that I am passionate about as well. The latest smack-down from the group aimed at me comes as a result of my mention of Peter’s stance towards legalizing prostitution.
In the bizzaro world of Peter’s Page, such topics are considered taboo because of the aforementioned family sensitivities. I might feel more compassion for their position if Peter himself hadn’t been so forthright on these very same issues when he was alive. Peter never shied away from confrontation about issues he felt strongly about and neither do I.
Why the family should feel shamed by discussions surrounding the subjects so near and dear to Peter is puzzling. I can’t help but wonder how far Peter’s Page wants to take this newly found protectionist attitude? For chrissakes folks, we’re talking about a fellow who confronted not only the medical/prison industrial complex, but also the issue of his own homosexuality in a society openly hostile towards same.
His family should feel no shame at all. They should be angry about the way he was treated by authorities and proud that he stood up for what he believed in. The work that Peter did in advancing the cause of medical marijuana has advanced greatly since his death. That said, even the Obama administration, despite public statements to the contrary, is still raiding medical cannabis dispensaries in states that have legalized it’s use in that regard. The war is far from over. I will not let the memory of a fallen comrade, nor the advancement of the goals he believed in, be glossed over for the sole purpose of defending the delicate sensibilities of family members he himself apparently discounted when he was still alive.
No, I’m not talking about the latest Charlie Sheen video. Those were great. He’s filling Thunderdomes across the country with raucous winners all paying good money for “Charlie” content. Those free samples everyone derided him for giving away last week look to be paying off quite well for him this week. There’s a word for that.
What is seriously painful to see are the pitiful, trollish, throw Charlie Sheen under the bus, so-called-unbiased-media (SCUM) slanders being lobbed his way everyday. The latest outrage comes courtesy of the New York Times, under the headline: Charlie Sheen, Bernie Madoff and Your Money
I’d normally block quote and debunk such a story, piece by piece, but it’s not necessary for the purpose of plainly pointing out that any analogy between Charlie Sheen and Bernie Madoff is guaranteed to be just another tedious twist of trollish logic designed to boost NYTimes web traffic by using Charlie’s name to attract attention to a story defaming him and his supporters.
I do have a minor complaint with Charlie though. He’s making me jump through hoops to get a position as his summer social media intern. Don’t get me wrong. I’m happy to have made it to the second round of people under consideration, but a bit disappointed that he didn’t sense the aura of tiger blood emanating from my initial application and hire me immediately.
Mr. Zune turned to suicide today when interest in his plight became so ‘tepid’ that even the folks at the Suicide Prevention Hot-line refused to take his calls.
Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) will stop introducing new versions of the Zune music and video player because of tepid demand, letting the company shift its focus to other devices
with similarly tepid demand,according to a person familiar with the decision.