The idea-contest hijacking was orchestrated by some who knows a little about running for Governor. Loretta Nall, who was a Libertarian candidate in 2006. Needless to say, she's not happy that the Davis camp is ignoring her coup. She's encouraging supporters to write to Davis:
"Point out all the positive things that would come from legalizing marijuana. New source of revenue for our cash starved state. New jobs when we are facing the worst unemployment rates in 25 years. Easing prison overcrowding and saving tens of millions of dollars that we spend to arrest, prosecute and incarcerate peaceful citizens for ingesting a natural plant. Point out that we should be allowed to pay tax thereby enriching the state and its citizens instead of our money going to violent drug cartels."
The incident proves a couple of points. 1) Candidate Davis is going to have to attract a lot more than 2300 people in a state of 4.6 million to win the election, 2) treading in the new media without a lot of foresight (and a staff with expertise) is dangerous. And 3) self-selected polling of any kind is subject to manipulation and is basically meaningless. That's why I always scoff at the TV News polls..."Go to our website and let us know what you think!" Yea, right.
Earlier today the online references to the questions about marijuana legalization and hemp were eliminated from the campaign website completely. Gone. But till then, "the ideas that will unlock Alabama's potential for the 21st century" included at the very top two ideas that he wanted to avoid like the plague. Will his opponents ignore the candidate's stumble?
[NOTE: The Monday Morning Media Memo is a regular feature of timlennox.com While it obviously is normally posted on Mondays, I'm posting it today because of the computer crash this week.]
[UPDATE: Tuesday, June 30, 2009: The Associated Press reports the story.]
The most Popular Posts of the past seven days.
Jun 26, 2009
MMMM # 48 New Media Can Bite
Democratic Rep. Artur Davis' campaign for Governor took a hit when they sought to follow President Obama into the world of new-media campaigning. In announcing the opening of their website, the campaign said they wanted Alabamians to send in "ideas that will unlock the 21st Century." Fair enough. So after a few weeks 80 ideas had been submitted (they might have done better if they hadn't required full registration)...and the winner is: legalize marijuana. Worst yet, for the campaign anyway, 118 of the 2300 people voting on the ideas approved, making it the top vote getter. Whoops. and the second highest vote getter (66 votes) was almost equally controversial: allow farmers to grow hemp, the no-THC version of the marijuana plant. In third place was draw up a new constitution.
So how does the candidate address the top two issue on his own campaign web site? Why, at first, he ignores it, of course. Here what the Davis camp sent out earlier this week:
"Our online community produced a lot of worthwhile ideas. Some of the leading choices included reforming Alabama's outdated 1901 constitution, reforming our education system, making our tax structure less regressive, connecting our state through mass transit, and creating an environmental agency with real teeth."
Oh Mr. candidate...what about the legalize marijuana vote?
Mr. candidate?
Silence.
The idea-contest hijacking was orchestrated by some who knows a little about running for Governor. Loretta Nall, who was a Libertarian candidate in 2006. Needless to say, she's not happy that the Davis camp is ignoring her coup. She's encouraging supporters to write to Davis:
"Point out all the positive things that would come from legalizing marijuana. New source of revenue for our cash starved state. New jobs when we are facing the worst unemployment rates in 25 years. Easing prison overcrowding and saving tens of millions of dollars that we spend to arrest, prosecute and incarcerate peaceful citizens for ingesting a natural plant. Point out that we should be allowed to pay tax thereby enriching the state and its citizens instead of our money going to violent drug cartels."
The incident proves a couple of points. 1) Candidate Davis is going to have to attract a lot more than 2300 people in a state of 4.6 million to win the election, 2) treading in the new media without a lot of foresight (and a staff with expertise) is dangerous. And 3) self-selected polling of any kind is subject to manipulation and is basically meaningless. That's why I always scoff at the TV News polls..."Go to our website and let us know what you think!" Yea, right.
Earlier today the online references to the questions about marijuana legalization and hemp were eliminated from the campaign website completely. Gone. But till then, "the ideas that will unlock Alabama's potential for the 21st century" included at the very top two ideas that he wanted to avoid like the plague. Will his opponents ignore the candidate's stumble?
[NOTE: The Monday Morning Media Memo is a regular feature of timlennox.com While it obviously is normally posted on Mondays, I'm posting it today because of the computer crash this week.]
[UPDATE: Tuesday, June 30, 2009: The Associated Press reports the story.]
The idea-contest hijacking was orchestrated by some who knows a little about running for Governor. Loretta Nall, who was a Libertarian candidate in 2006. Needless to say, she's not happy that the Davis camp is ignoring her coup. She's encouraging supporters to write to Davis:
"Point out all the positive things that would come from legalizing marijuana. New source of revenue for our cash starved state. New jobs when we are facing the worst unemployment rates in 25 years. Easing prison overcrowding and saving tens of millions of dollars that we spend to arrest, prosecute and incarcerate peaceful citizens for ingesting a natural plant. Point out that we should be allowed to pay tax thereby enriching the state and its citizens instead of our money going to violent drug cartels."
The incident proves a couple of points. 1) Candidate Davis is going to have to attract a lot more than 2300 people in a state of 4.6 million to win the election, 2) treading in the new media without a lot of foresight (and a staff with expertise) is dangerous. And 3) self-selected polling of any kind is subject to manipulation and is basically meaningless. That's why I always scoff at the TV News polls..."Go to our website and let us know what you think!" Yea, right.
Earlier today the online references to the questions about marijuana legalization and hemp were eliminated from the campaign website completely. Gone. But till then, "the ideas that will unlock Alabama's potential for the 21st century" included at the very top two ideas that he wanted to avoid like the plague. Will his opponents ignore the candidate's stumble?
[NOTE: The Monday Morning Media Memo is a regular feature of timlennox.com While it obviously is normally posted on Mondays, I'm posting it today because of the computer crash this week.]
[UPDATE: Tuesday, June 30, 2009: The Associated Press reports the story.]
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Tim,
ReplyDeleteDoes "idea-contest hijacking" mean that Loretta organized an effort to draw her pro-pot folks to vote for this issue on Artur's website?
If so, can this be validated?
I posted the opening of the campaign site soliciting ideas from the public on my blog and asked Alabama citizens who support this issue to go and vote the idea up. The opening of the website for ideas was also carried by Left In Alabama.
ReplyDeleteHowever, since there were 2300 votes cast by other people visiting the website, sans my encouragement, to vote on other topics, and they didn't vote the marijuana topic down (when it was clearly the top idea and everyone saw it) says that the idea would have been popular even without my asking other Alabama citizens to vote for it.
The fact that Davis acted like the idea was never posted and voted to the top of all the ideas and then removed the posts altogether speaks volumes. He didn't expect backlash from the people who took the time to register on his site and share their opinions. Now he is hopefully going to regret that. If he doesn't want ideas from the public then he shouldn't ask for them.
I wonder if we should ask him if there are any other ideas that we shouldn't bother asking him about?
Thanks for posting about this Tim. It would have made a great segment for FTR!
"... can this be validated?"
ReplyDeleteWhy, of course!
IP tracing.
Of course, I wouldn't imagine the dope-smoking crowd to be familiar with Diffie-Hellman keys or other such high-level crypto-stuff.
The "legalization" of marijuana is fraught with a myriad of issues, not the least of which is that at the federal level "we the people" by and through our elected U.S. government officials has authority over, and law against it. And, at this juncture, and in the foreseeable future, it is a Class I narcotic/drug, meaning it has no recognized or valid medical use, and is illegal in every situation, save perhaps, as it may be excepted for approved research.
Loretta's hijacking of Davis' website could have negative repercussions for her and any effort she might ostensibly promote. The actions witnessed could hardly be considered "viral marketing."
And while I sincerely doubt that the possibility of purposeful and malicious destruction of the website through conscientious DOS (Denial of Service) by flooding or other means could or would be done by them, the public perception of the "average" marijuana smoker is not a positively glowing citizen held in high esteem, but rather of ill repute.
Further, who could forget, "... I didn't inhale"? It's laughable at best, and certainly less than insincere at worst.
And imagine this sound bite: "I'm sorry son/daughter, daddy/mama can't play/help you for the next 18 hours because I'm/we're/they're stoned/drunk/high."? How about this one: "Bill, Susan... would you both have any objections to minding the kids for the next day and a half? We want to get stoned/high/drunk."
Regarding any assertion of claim that Alabama (or any other state) has prisons that are full of "peaceful" offenders - aka marijuana smokers - whose solitary offense was to possess marijuana, I dare say that most inmates probably had additional time put on them for such an offense, which was by no means their primary, worst or first offense. In fact, I would assert that the exceeding majority of inmates have cultivated the habit of smoking marijuana.
"... ingesting a natural plant." Papaver sominferums L. is a "natural plant," but the substance which is derived from it, and for which it is most renown/infamous is also illegal. Some may be familiar with it, if in passing only. It's called "heroin."
Curious... but I wonder as a "Libertarian" candidate (or one proclaiming "Libertarian" values), if she'd come out and publicly favor of the legalization of prostitution. After all, that is a Libertarian platform, and one over which the state has absolute control. And then, that whole issue inevitably results in sexual slavery - it's a mess, to be certain. It's called "sex tourism" in Bangkok, and has spread to our shores by those "huddled masses yearning to breathe free," and the coyotes (a derogatory term describing human smugglers who care nothing for human life) and pimps that enslave them.
Of course, if you think about it, the manufacture, sale, distribution and consumption of crystal meth is a "private consensual" matter.
May I clarify the original post? When I used the phrase "idea-contest hijacking", I was exercising my creative writing genes. I did NOT mean anything illegal had been done. All Loretta Nall did was exercise her right to take part in the candidate's unrestricted solicitation of ideas. As she points out, other folks did the same thing, but with less success. The campaign should have anticipated something like this in the first place.
ReplyDeletetsk tsk Kevin L...dope-smokers indeed. Such a derogatory term. And to say that people who smoke pot "wouldn't be familiar with Diffie-Hellman keys or other such high-level crypto-stuff" is laughable. 'Dope smoking' programmers rule the internet.
ReplyDeleteI can see that you are not someone who is familiar with drug policy or the damage the drug war has wrought on this supposedly 'Free Country'. Show me one place in the US Constitution that expressly prohibits smoking marijuana or using any other substance. And remember that states did not outlaw it until the 1937 Harrison Tax Act was passed by the federal government at the insistance of Henry Anslinger who said smoking marijuana made Blacks and Mexicans go crazy and rape the White women. Reefer Madness indeed.
As for your quip about parenting I have to tell you that my son, who will be a senior this year, is attending the Alabama School of Math and Science in Mobile and maintained a 3.8 grade average in his first year there. My daughter is working to get into the Alabama School of Fine Arts after 7th grade. So much for the unconcerned stoned parent picture you paint.
As for prostitution...yes I support legalizing it. It is another thing that is only made worse by outlawing it and something that will never be controlled through outright prohibition. Legalizing it would put safety regulations (like testing for disease) in place and make the women and men who choose to engage of their own volition safer, less susceptible to abuse and murder at the hands of their customers/pimps. It would move it to one selected area of any given town, like the red light district in Amsterdam or just outside the city limits in Las Vegas, Nevada. San Francisco is currently looking into legalizing prostitution.
Meth is available by prescription via physicians. Its called Desoxyn and is prescribed for ADD, ADHD, depression and obesity. It should be made available to meth addicts much like methadone is made available to opiate addicts. If we would do that then we wouldn't have to live next to people who have enough chemicals in their homes/sheds/cars to level six city blocks and children wouldn't be living in homes where they are exposed to battery acid and other such nasty chemicals where it is made. Additionally users of the prescription version don't experience nearly as many bad side effects as users of the street version do.
continued in next post
I don't think participating in the Davis poll of ideas was in any way hijacking it. He asked for ideas and for participation from the public. The whole idea is to get visitors to his website to submit and vote on ideas and I helped him accomplish that. It makes sense that he wanted those visiting his site to tell others so they could visit and vote as well. Where is the hijack in doing that? Did Left in Alabama also hijack the site because they posted about it as well?
ReplyDeleteAs to the comment about prisoners...my information comes directly from the ALDOC site which shows clearly that 30% of prisoners currently serving time in an Alabama prison are there for drug offenses. The DOC does not break it down by type of drug. Only the Sentencing Commission has those numbers and they won't come off of them. However, a year or so ago the Birmingham News reported that 50% of all drug arrests in Alabama are for simple possession for personal use of marijuana. Not cultivation, trafficking or distribution. Alabama law regarding marijuana goes like this. The first time you are arrested for simple possession it's a misdemeanor punishable by up to a year in jail and a $2000 fine. Any subsequent arrest is an automatic felony, even if it is just a seed or stem, and punishable by up to 10 years in prison. I think it is very safe to say that a large portion of that 30% of Alabama inmates is there for simple marijuana possession.
As for state determining drug laws yes they do and they follow the fed lead. Since Artur Davis is running for Governor it is perfectly reasonable to engage him in this particular conversation as he/legislature would have the final say over any law passed regarding the legalization of marijuana.
You say that since the feds say marijuana has no medicinal value then it must not. Please explain to me then why the feds and pharma companies already have patents on marijuana? And why did the pharma companies synthesize THC and turn it into a drug called Marinol for cancer and nausea patients? No medical value indeed. There are mountains of independent studies that say otherwise.
Thanks for your clarification Tim. I understood that from the beginning...apparently some of your readers who don't 'smoke dope' have a comprehension problem :)
ReplyDeleteKevin L got pwned. BTW my initials are Kevin L too but I'm all for legalization. And I don't even smoke weed so stop associating legalization with smokers.
ReplyDeleteMrs. Nall, while I respect your right to hold an opinion, my respect by no means infers that I agree with your position that prostitution, illicit narcotics such as heroin, cocaine, crystal meth and others, along with numerous other such societal ills should be legalized.
ReplyDeleteIndeed, I am vehemently opposed to the legalization of illicitly used narcotics not only for the reason that any alleged benefit derived from their legitimization and wholesale use by the general public would exceedingly negate any perceived benefit which may be realized by any taxation effort.
Further, I have never met any person whom has suffered the misfortune of being caught up and trapped in substance abuse/addiction whom has NOT had any issue of mental health. In the professional health community, it's known as "self medicating," and is the abusers attempt to assuage feelings they either deny or refuse to acknowledge, frequently in conjunction with self-condemnation over an issue which they have no control.
For those whom have escaped the evils of narcotics addiction through NA, AA or other self-help and 12-step-groups, I have NEVER heard anyone say they were glad they started using.
The abuse of drugs is a societal ill which cannot be cured by legitimizing them through legalization. The underlying issue of mental health is by far the more important issue we face when dealing with criminal habituation to support addiction and the evil enterprises spawned by the wicked ones whom prey upon our children and those in their weakest moments merely because they seek a fiduciary gain.
To assert or claim that crime rates would decrease as a result of "decriminalization" of heroin, cocaine, crystal meth, prostitution and more, is patently absurd.
While children are - in general terms of good behavior in politics - off the table for discussion, I remind the readers that it was you whom mentioned your children.
It seems you are using your children as an attempt to legitimize your illicit behavior and promotion of the same, or you have no sense of decorum. I sense it may well be both. For shame, madam! Shame upon you for so despicably using a child for your own misguided and self-centered means!
I recall an article written by James Joyner, PhD, whom cited another article which read in part, "Loretta Nall, the Libertarian Party’s write-in candidate for governor of Alabama... is offering T-shirts and marijuana stash boxes adorned with a photo of her with a plunging neckline and the words: “More of these boobs.” The Libertarian Party could not collect the 40,000 voter signatures needed to get her name on the ballot, and she has not reached the $25,000 threshold in contributions that would require her to file a campaign finance report."
Dear Mrs. Nall... it seems quite evident, and is my opinion that no one - save perhaps yourself - takes you seriously, including your own party.
Kevin L your 'arguments' are laughable.
ReplyDeleteYou are using the tired old tactic of trying to demonize the user by claiming all people who use drugs are mentally ill and self-medicating. Some are, no doubt about that, but not the majority. Are all people who drink alcohol responsibly mentally ill? Are people who use tobacco mentally ill?
Let me ask you something. Did you ever spin around in circles when you were a kid until you got dizzy and fell down? I'll bet you did (if you're normal that is). Any idea why you might have done that? Why to alter your state of consciousness of course. It is natural human and animal behavior to alter ones state of consciousness. Animals in the wild will seek out fermented fruit to get drunk on. Nothing about altering ones state of consciousness suggests mental illness.
As to parenting, you brought that up in your first post. I refuted your innuendo that all people who smoke marijuana are uncaring, unconcerned parents and provided you with a shining example in my own children. Would you rather I had used someone elses kids as an example? Ok. How are Jenna and Barbara Bush doing having been raised by an alcoholoic father who admitted to using marijuana and cocaine? How's Chelsea Clinton getting along these days? Do the Obama girls look neglected to you? Reckon Bush, Clinton and Obama are mentally ill?
Please don't speak of the Libertarian Party and what they think of me because that isn't something that you can possibly know firsthand. I don't recall ever seeing you at an LP EC meeting and the post you speak of was written by someone who may claim to be a Libertarian but is not affiliated with the Alabama Libertarian Party. And, just like the media was unable to embarrass me because I have female anatomy, so too will you be unable to embarrass me by referring to said anatomy. Anyone with half a brain can see clearly that I won that particular battle with the media by turning the tables on two dirty old men who chose to talk about my anatomy and not my platform. I would explain to you how it all happened but I've come to the conclusion that smart people get it and those who don't aren't smart and are a waste of my valuable time.
I happened upon these jewels yesterday after posting, and found both quite germane.
ReplyDelete"Almost every case I deal with - and I do hundreds and hundreds - there is an addiction component. (The crime) is almost always committed in order to get drugs or while on drugs."
- Lauderdale County Circuit Judge Mike Jones
Segregating sexes critical to substance abuse rehab
By Michelle Rupe Eubanks, TimesDaily Staff Writer
Published: Sunday, June 28, 2009 at 3:30 a.m.
http://www.timesdaily.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20090628/ARTICLES/906285041/1011/NEWS&tc=email_newsletter&template=printart
A 33-year, longitudinal follow-up study of narcotics addicts by the Drug Abuse Research Center, Neuropsychiatric Institute, University of California, Los Angeles was published in the Archives of General Psychiatry 2001; 58:503-508 and followed 581 addicts in the California Civil Addict Program (CAP) a compulsory drug treatment program for narcotic-dependent criminal offenders. There were three interviews, 1974-75, 1985-86 and 1997-97. In the latest follow-up in 1997 (which had a 96% location rate), 284 were dead, 242 were interviewed, and 31 were either refused, or were too mentally dysfunctional to be interviewed.
Past-year heroin use was very nearly as high as marijuana use, 40.5 & 35.5%s respectively, and before age 18, more than 80% had tried marijuana, more than 80% had been arrested, with 60% of them using heroin before age 20. High rates of health, mental health and criminal justice system involvement.
The user-group consistently reported higher rates of disability, psychological distress (depression, anxiety, etc.), cigarette smoking, daily alcohol drinking, other illicit drug use (marijuana, cocaine, crack, amphetamine, etc.), and criminal involvement (property crime, drug trafficking, incarceration, etc.) and lower rates of employment (60.3% unemployed).
Correspondingly, abstinence from illicit narcotics use was associated with low psychological distress, low criminality, morbidity (death), and higher employment.