In that letter, which appeared late in July last year (I was sentenced on July 6), Adelstein tells a few lies and labels me a "common criminal" for, I guess, being convicted of a marijuana charge. In one of several comments Adelstein left on that topic thread was this gem:
From much authentic and well documented information, Marijuana is an entry drug. If this true, and I believe that it is, then legalized, and widespread use of Marijuana would lead a greater use of other, more damaging drugs like cocaine, heroin and maybe meth (though the information that I was relying on was before the onset of the meth problem)
If you accept both the first premise, and would also accept that widespread use of coke, etc is injurious to the general societal good then legislation to prevent that general injury trumps the right of absolute non -governmental intervention in individual choices. If you accept neither the premise or the societal damage, I guess that we would have respectfully disagree.
[...snipped paragraphs...]
By the way, maybe a surprise - many, and I mean many (I am after all 79) years ago I had a girl friend who insisted that Marijuana increased the pleasure of sex. She was beautiful, intelligent, and successful. No matter how many of her cigarettes that I tried - it just did not get any better than with none!
*****
In the course of the conversation, Stan accused me of being a liar and called me a "common criminal" for being convicted of possessing cannabis. He excuses himself from the same classification by virtue of the fact that he was not arrested and charged.
Please go read the thread, "On nice ladies and gangster governments,". Note particularly how "bearcreekbat" takes Adelstein's pants off and burns them.
When Adelstein says cannabis is an "entry" drug, I think he has something else in mind than what the rest of us do. For his definition of "entry," being rich is probably far more effective than having good weed.
Incidentally, I am not posting this because I think what happened to me is anything special. On the contrary, it is all too common. I think it's a pretty good example of how a politician can try to appear to take a stand on something when in fact he is all over the ballfield on the issue, trying to play every position while knowing nothing about the game.
22 comments:
That may be too kind of a description of our buddy Stan. The man is just a self-righteous moron.
But I did have to giggle just a bit at his admission that he ahd actually tried MJ. Would have like to have been a fly on the wall.
I thought Stan was remarkable candid, thoughtful, and at times even penitent in his remarks. It was good that he had the guts to come on and face his critics, even expressing a willingness to reconsider.
What more do you want from the man?
It would be nice if he apologized for lying about me.
Perhaps you made a bad impression? It's possible. I've seen you do it. Besides, I've noticed apologies aren't your strong suit either. To err is human, forgiveness divine.
Here's your chance to be the bigger man, PA.
The secret jumping off point to enlightenment.
Think of it. It could happen for you just like
°°°
that.
I haven't heard anyone asking for forgiveness. It would be arrogant of me to forgive someone who doesn't desire such a dispensation from me, wouldn't it?
I don't think Stan's disorientation with reality amounts to stupidity or a lack of IQ rising to the level of a moron. Stan's not stupid.
He has on occasion been ill-informed and has chosen to act on bad information. So, for those moments, he should have to relinquish his Mensa membership.
That he has successfully passed himself off as a fiscal conservative all the while embracing every tax on the little guy known to man, is - at least to me - a indication that he is really quite clever.
I don't like what he did to Newland. I don't like what he helped do to Kooiker. In fact, there's not much about his politics that I do like, other than his ability to keep Ellie Schweisow out of office, and for that the state owes him their gratitude for saving at least a modicum of their freedom.
Finally, I believe Stan WANTS to be a statesman. He just doesn't know how. At 79, it is time for him to relinquish his Senate seat at the end of the term. If he doesn't, he'll have more formidable opposition than he has in the past.
PA and Bob, if you truly desire change to come, you would welcome any shade of acceptance and put down the sword of revenge. Who as a proponent of eliminating this crazy drug war on MJ should I be upset with, those who might bring change, or you who continue to alienate those who could bring change?
Les, I would suggest that instead of railing at me for being desirous of something I have not proposed (i.e., "revenge"), you call up some of those who have the power to effect that which you say you desire, who have had it for some time, and who have done nothing to effect it, and say something of value to them.
It appears we have wounded heels here... Now to just get Stan singing Leadbelly's 'almost gone'
I tried to find Leadbelly's "Almost Gone." Couldn't find a song so titled. "Almost Done," maybe?
Sorry, try "On a monday', either way, he's almost gone.
On your suggestion I read the thread. I was struck by the civilized dialogue which took place between bearcreekbat and Stan Adelstein, and even more struck by the fact that Adelstein ended by saying he was going to re-think his position on the issue. Bob my friend, bearcreekbat accomplished more in two or three blog posts than you have accomplished in two or three years of ranting.
When the dam breaks, all most people see is the final rock that fell before the water came out.
Nice little patronizing pat on the shoulder, my friend.
Wayne, exactly. Thank you.
Bob, no. Forgiveness is selfless, not arrogant. Drop the ego (persona mask) and forgiveness is just there, standing, always. How could it be otherwise?
Most of us learn this by having small children around. They never ask for forgiveness, and always get it.
It is the nature of things, grasshoppah.
The way I see it, Newland came along about 10 years ago and went to the legislature and told the truth. For that he was vilified and lied about. He responded by pointing out the inconsistencies and innate cruelty of their positions.
For that, they vilified him more, and some, like Adelstein, even started lying about him.
The way I see it, Newland moved "rocks" (to extend PA's analogy) with dynamite and a bulldozer, so folks like bearcreekbat could come along with a rake and a hoe and seem like "reasonable" gardeners.
Malcolm X was unreasonable. MLK was unreasonable. They wanted to be treated like people, if you can imagine it. Along came Barack Obama and, since the boulders had been moved, he could smooth out the ground with a trowel and a little talk about "hope."
OT,
No question that Bob moved mountains for the cause and organized a lot of people, even to the point of being a (reluctant?) martyr.
The discussion here is how he's handling his personal and professional relationship with Stan.
When you run a team of organizers (salespeople) you try to match personalities with the customer. Bob and Stan seem to have a few hitches in their git-along.
I'm just encouraging Bob to get past his resentment. Life's too short to live in that space.
And in that regard, it doesn't matter what Stan thinks or how Stan feels. It only matters how Bob thinks and feels.
I think morons like Stan Adelstein serve Newland's (and my) cause well. Their personal idiocy really does more to illustrate the idiocy of their position than Newland's good sense and well-documented position does.
...well, he IS an engineer. (artist joke...)
Stan said he's going to rethink his position. OMG, I feel waves of political change coming from his direction already! Nice gentle raking, that's the ticket.
Someone needs to coddle his ass all the way out of our government. It could work.
It could be worse. You could still have Napoli in there.
BTW, time to get Krause out.
Post a Comment