Why are "liberal" states suddenly going conservative on the Pot issue?

::::::::

When the Berkeley Barb was busy railing against the Vietnam War, the editors would have to throw in some change-of-pace items to provide readers with a bit of serendipity outrage and so occasionally lefties would be asked to save a ration of their activist energies to become upset with the fact that some kindred spirits were being given life sentences for possession of a single marijuana cigarette.

The conservatives were adamant that the hippies in flyover country were getting what they deserved.   Now they wonder if they'd catch the liberals off guard by suggesting that any of those lifers who are still in prison should be given a pardon and their freedom.  

Any kid who was given a life sentence in 1968, will if he or she were 20 years old at the time, be turning 65 this year.   What conservative wouldn't be a walking example of schadenfreude in action if the folks who have been in prison all this time are given a full pardon (and thus save their state the cost of their incarceration) and face a life of retirement coping with a monthly Social Security check of Zero?

Isn't it odd that in the states that had a liberal attitude towards pot smokers back when LBJ was the president, they are now experiencing a wave of change that indicates that rather than bring a liberal attitude to the states where some pot heads may still be serving out their life sentences, the states that were liberal are now being urged to fill their privatized prisons with culprits who wanted to toke up.   Would that be a retroactive "win" for the states that handed out life sentences for pot, all those years ago? 

The CBS Evening News recently reported that many youths who are detained on possible violations of gun laws in Chicago must be released because of crowded prisons which make incarcerating the gun packing kids impossible.

No liberal or conservative will ever suggest sending the pistol packin' punks from Chi to a privatized prison in Cali because the folks who run the privatize prisons aren't going to want to deal with thugs.   Doesn't it make sense that running a prison for space cadets who just want to chill is a much more appealing prospect than supervising a building full of toughs who know all about zip guns, shivs, and gang war brawling? 

So it is that after all these years, the life sentences for pot are being retroactively ratified rather than revoked.

The kids who got a life sentence in the Sixties for a single reefer are now reaching that stage of life where constant medical attention will be subsidized by the states where they reside.   What conservative would not endorse the cost reduction option of cutting them loose at this late date and teaching them the value of self reliance via the old sink or swim tough love pardons? 

If filling California privatized prisons with pot smokers while cutting shooters loose in Chicago doesn't make sense to the readers of this column, perhaps they can start to change their thinking by rereading George Orwell's novel "1984" and paying particular attention to the passages explaining the concept of "double think."

At first the challenge of simultaneously holding two contradictory thoughts may seem like an impossible assignment, but if a white belt in a "double think" class watches the Republicans holding political offices it soon becomes evident that proficiency in "double think" can be achieved.

Students of double think, naturally, start their journey to enlightenment with the most difficult assignments.  

For instance, a student will learn that George W. Bush didn't have to have provide a coherent explanation for how the World Trade Center buildings fall down and go boom, other than "fool me twice . .   . won't get fooled again!," but President Obama must explain where he was and what he was doing (and with whom) when the attack on Bengazi was first being reported and then he must provide a full minute by minute account of how it was permitted to occur.   A double standard for explanations?   Are you really baffled by the question of "Why would one standard be applied to "Tex,' and another to a Democratic President from . . . Hawaii?"

Students start shouting "Tell us!" and repeat the chant over and over again until they work themselves into a frenzy.   Try this at home and see if, after a couple a strong drinks and a few hours of chanting, you aren't ready for a good old fashioned "necktie party." 

If a country is full of frustrated long term unemployed people, why not open up the employment market more by giving citizenships to resident illegal aliens?

Why would Americans believe that sending troops into harm's way in a country where it is are just as likely for the locals to blow them up as it is for the enemy to set off an IUD, is a matter of necessity?   Isn't it obvious that a country that has been reliant on the patriarch tradition that is centuries old, they'll be ripe for change and anxious to try this Democracy fad? 

If invading Iraq in a search for nonexistent WMD's worked out so well, what's the delay for doing a replay in Iran?

In a nation that fought WWII to preserve the Four Freedoms, isn't it obvious that as the liberal media does the Cheshire cat disappearing act there will be growing need for liberals to buy a copy of "Conservative Thinking für Dumbkopfs" before they get tossed into Room 101 for a bit of attitude adjustment? 

Speaking of that, it seems to us that the St. Patrick's Day festivities at O'Kelly's bar (and the nearby Tiki bar?) at Guantanimo will be the wildest blowout since the good old days at the Purple Porpoise.   (If you have to ask, you don't have the security clearance to get an explanation.)

That brings to mind an old perplexing question:   Was Felix Rodriguez pulling our leg when he bragged that, oh so long ago, a member of the Berkeley City Council (whom only he called "Che") was causing a sensation singing at amateur night at the local C&W bars?  

Rather than spinning our wheels futilely on liberal causes that will be filibustered in the court of pop culture, the new thinking at the World's Laziest Journalist headquarters is that we should point out that Mick Jagger has song numerous noteworthy duets and Willie Nelson has had an album using all famous singing partners ("Half Nelson"), so why haven't they teamed up with each other?   Who wouldn't like to hear them do a duet for a rerecording of "On the road again"?   Or "Crazy"?   Or "Satisfaction"?

What would it sound like if a clever recording engineer, spliced together the Mick Jagger (from "Ned Kelly") and John Wayne (from "The Quiet Man") versions of the song "Wild Colonial Boy"? 

If it's true, as we have read in James Michener's novel "Texas," that when Texas joined the Union, they included in the agreement, a clause that says at their option they could break up into five separate states (which would mean 10 men in the Senate), we wonder if the talk about secession might not take a surprising new turn someday soon.

We have been told (hearsay evidence isn't admissible in court)   that at one time in the past, the airplanes at a Texas Air Force base were picking up the AM band broadcasts (on super station XERF) of Wolfman Jack.

Speaking of going in new directions and doublethink, we might start to do some market research fact finding to learn the potential for forming a group to promote and appreciate hypocrisy.  

Liberals who have never even tried doublethink can not conceive how a gay, pot smoking, Republican could ever endorse his party's agenda, but if the liberals ever embrace hypocrisy it will be "game over" for the Republicans at election time.  

Meanwhile, until that day comes, we have an FDR utterance for our closing quote.

Bartlett's quotes a speech given, by FDR, on October 30, 1940, as saying:   "Your boys are not going to be sent into any foreign wars."  

Now the disk jockey will play George Hamilton IV's "Abilene," Dean Martin's "Houston," and Marty Robin's "El Paso."   We have to go do a Google News search for Sgt. Sunshine, the SF policeman who toked up on the front steps of City Hall way back when.   Have a "I'm a rich boy now!" type of Giant week.

Authors Website: marijuana-news.org/smokesignals

Authors Bio:

BP graduated from college in the mid sixties (at the bottom of the class?) He told his draft board that Vietnam could be won without his participation. He is still appologizing for that mistake. He received his fist photo lesson from a future Pulitzer Prize winner. (Eddie Adams in the AP lunch room told him to get rid of the everready case for his new Nikon F). A Pulitzer Prize winning reporter broke BP in on the police beat for a small daily in Pa. By 1975, Paul Newman had asked for Bob's Autograph.
(Google this: "Paul Newman asked my autograph" and click the top suggested URL.)
His co-workers on the weekly newspaper in Santa Monica,(in the Seventies) included a future White House correspondent for Time magazine and one of the future editors high up on the Playboy masthead. Bob has been to the Oscar ceremony twice before Oscar turned 50.
He is working on a book of memoirs tentatively titled "Paul Newman Asked for my Autograph." In the gold mining area of Australia (Kalgoorlie), Bob was called: "Col. Sanders."