Mike Gardner: CBS Evening News With Walter Cronkite- 'President Richard Nixon Enlists Governor's Aid In The War on Drugs (1971)'

Source:Mike Gardner- The CBS Evening News, covering President Richard M. Nixon and his failed War on Drugs, in 1971.

"Nixon enlists Governor's aid in the war on drugs. Nixon's psychedelic film experiment." 

From Mike Gardner 

I'm not sure about the exact year of this newscast, but I believe it's 1971. 

President Nixon actually seemed to have some good ideas up front when he launched the fake War on Drugs in 1971. Programs designed that were about prevention and treatment. Teaching students the dangers of using narcotics and get drug addicts into treatment instead of jail. 

Now, had President Nixon actually followed through on those policy's in his five and a half years as President, maybe the so-called War on Drugs wouldn't be the failure and joke that it is today. Where if anything narcotics are more available forty years later than they were then. And where we now have 2M people in prison today, the largest prison population in the world. And we only represent about 6% of the world's population, both China and India have four times as many people as we do and we have more prison inmates than they do. 

We have so many prison inmates, that we have overcrowded prisons and jails all across the country. Where hundreds of thousands of these people are in jail for using or possessing narcotics. You can actually go to prison or jail in America "The Land of the Free" for possession of narcotics. We now have drug addicts taking jail and prison cells that would normally be operated by violent offenders, people who belong in prison and belong there for a long time. 

Actually, one good thing about our overcrowded prisons and cells, is that some states like California (to use as an example) are now releasing non-violent offenders like drug addicts (to use as an example) shoplifters (would probably be another one) hopefully to halfway houses and drug rehab where they can get help for their issues. And help finding a job so they can be productive and saving that prison space for people who need to be there instead. California also has a debt and budget crisis as well. 

What we learned the last forty years in the fake War on Drugs or what we should've learned is how not to fight the War on Drugs. That it's not smart to treat drug dealers the same as drug addicts. Drug addicts are patients with a disease, called addiction they are not able to tell themselves that they've had enough cocaine. Or whatever they are addicted to, similar to obesity or alcoholism, 

Drug addicts should be treated like patients: send cocaine, heroin, and meth addicts to drug rehab instead of jail or prison and put them on what's called a three strikes policy to get them off of their addiction, not cure them, but get them off of whatever narcotics they are addicted to. 

Strike one, voluntary drug rehab. Strike two, involuntary drug rehab in jail. Strike three, jail time as well as more drug rehab in jail. And make them pay for all of their drug rehab as well. 

Drug dealers though should be treated like the criminals that they are because they prey off of addicts in order to make as much money from them as possible. Including blackmail and extortion and these people need to be in prison doing long sentences. And of course give them a shot at building their lives so they can get a legal job once they leave prison. 

The fake War on Drugs is about supply and demand like anything else in our economy. If people want something bad enough, there's going to be somebody to sell them what they want. So if drug dealers have less customers wanting their dope, meaning fewer drug addicts, they'll make less money. 

Euro News: 'EU Food Row Could Spark Poverty Crisis'

 

Source:Euro News- poverty is everywhere.

"Euronews is a pan-European pay television news network, headquartered in Lyon, France. The network began broadcasting on 1 January 1993 and aimed to cover world news from a pan-European perspective.

It is jointly owned by several European and North African public and state-owned broadcasting organizations, and is currently majority-owned (88%) by Media Globe Networks, led by Egyptian billionaire Naguib Sawiris, who is the chairman of the supervisory board. It is also a provider of live streaming world news, which can be viewed in many countries (e.g., not in the USA) via its website, on YouTube, and on various mobile devices and digital media players." 

From Wikipedia 

"A dispute over aid to Europe's poorest citizens threatens to spark a major food crisis, France has warned. The EU programme currently provides hand outs to at least 13 million poverty-hit Europeans at centres like this in Brussels. But that could be axed after a group of six countries, including Germany and Britain, threatened to pull the plug on a 500-million-euro yearly scheme. Volunteers at charity Resto du Coeur say a cut to the funding would be devastating. Euro News." 

From Euro News

Here's more evidence that America is not the only developed nation in the world, that Europe as well as Japan and Korea have poverty as well. It's not just a liberal democracy like the United States that has struggled with poverty, but these social democracies (even when Conservatives are in power) in Europe has poverty of their own. 

And that even social democracies have poverty as well that they have to deal with and of course if people have more freedom like people do in America as it relates to economic freedom, of course there's a chance that they'll make mistakes with their own lives. Not getting educated enough, having kids too soon before they are emotionally and financially ready to care for them. Or make bad investments with their money, all things that can to lead to poverty. 

With economic freedom at least individual are making their own mistakes, instead of big government doing that for them. They are making mistakes with their own lives, instead of government making mistakes with their lives. Which can happen in a social democracy where the government has more authority and more control over its people as it relates to the economy. 

All these countries in Europe have universal health care, education, pension, transportation, housing, etc. And yet they have people living in poverty, urban and rural, they have homeless people. Chances are some of the people in this video getting this Food Assistance are also homeless. 

Europeans immigrated from Europe obviously to America to the point. that 7-10 Americans are of European descent, not the other way around. Because they wanted their freedom and a chance to make it in the world with economic opportunity. And the freedom to chart their own course in life and by the way. 

Europeans are still immigrating to America today, obviously not as much as hundred years ago with the Jews, Irish, Italians, Poles, etc, but they are still coming. America has proven as a country that if you give people a good education, raise them properly and let them get themselves get a good job and you properly regulate the economy and everyone is paying their fair share in taxes, that Americans can chart their own course in life and make it on their own.  

What Economic Freedom and American Capitalism is all about (not cowboy capitalism that we've seen the last ten years) is about opportunity for everyone to succeed in life on their own. This is how Americans built the largest economy in the world as well as the most powerful military. 

What America has failed to do at least so far, is find a way where most is not all Americans can benefit from American capitalism. Which is why we have such a high poverty rate for a developed nation. And thats a big challenge for America in the 21st Century. 

So the two competing versions of democracy in the world, are liberal democracy from the United States and social democracy in the European Union. Me I prefer liberal democracy because even though we've made plenty of mistakes as a country, at least we are able to make these mistakes with our own lives. 

Durban Zanrik: John Stossel- 'Stupid in America'

Source:Durban Zanrik- Jimmy Kimmel Live With Jay Leno: hopefully not talking to the best that America has to offer.

"Stupid in America" is a nasty title for a program about public education, but some nasty things are going on in America's public schools and it's about time we face up to it." 

From Durban Zanrik

Are we stupid in America as a country? Well, if you consider the fact that a lot of Americans know exactly which rehab their favorite celebrities are currently staying at or which jail they're currently residing at (after being pulled over their latest drunk driving arrest) but couldn't name their own mayor or governor, even if you spotted them their first and last names, perhaps even their city and state, that would suggest to a lot of intelligent people that we're pretty stupid as a country. 

But what do intelligent people know anyway? We're they one of the first five people to buy the latest I-Phone (because they camped outside the store the night before) no, because they have lives and better things to do. 

To sound serious just for a minute: of course not we're not stupid as a country (even with all of our escaped mental patients and morons hogging up our airwaves and media) otherwise we  wouldn't be as developed as a nation as we are, with the largest economy in the world, with a military not only capable of defending ourselves very well, but also other developed nations but do we have stupid people. 

Looking at the intelligence levels of Americans is sort of like looking at Islamic or Christian terrorists: sure, there are terrorists in those groups, but the percentage is so small that you can't define those groups as terrorists, but you have enough spoiled food in them to make their groups look and taste bad. Show me a country that doesn't have stupid people and I sell you my Miami beach house that's located in Minnesota. 

Do we have stupid policy's? Of course in government and the private sector, education being a perfect example of that. 

To give you a couple of examples: we reward educators for their time of service, not quality of service. And once they've served a certain amount time, it's almost impossible to fire them, which is called teacher tenure. And them we wonder (or some of us may wonder) why we are 39th in the world in education, even though we have the largest economy. Because our educators know that they don't have to do the best job they can in order to keep it. Or get a raise, all they have to do is serve a certain amount of time. Where all other professions the employees are judged by the job that they do, not by how long they've been doing their job. 

A major cause for our lack of education in America, gets to  teacher unions, who's number one job is to give their members who pay for their service the best compensation and benefits possible, which they do a great job of. They are not in the business to make our public education System the best it can be. Thats supposed to be the job of our public officials. But if they get a lot of contributions from teacher unions, that makes their job very hard, because they know who pays for their campaigns. 

If we don't educate our students, we are not going to be able to produce enough workers in the future that we need working high skilled jobs and making good livings, making our economy as strong as it can be. And being ranked 39th in the world in education is not educating your students well enough. 

Because of our lack of quality of education (not quantity) we are going to have to continue importing high-skilled workers from other countries and in some cases developing countries like China and India as well as exporting those jobs over there to countries that have the high-skilled workers to work these jobs. Which means we have to treat our education profession which is one of our top five most important professions. Because without it, people wouldn't be able to get the education they need in order to get a good job. 

So we need to treat this critical profession as important as it is. Good workers are rewarded for the work, bad workers are retrained or removed and our customers (meaning the students and parents) get a choice in where they consume this service. We don't as a country treat our education system as important as it is, we allow low-performing educators stay in the system. 

As well as low-performing schools stay in the system, some students are forced to go to bad schools, because of where they live. And then or some of us wonder why we are 39th in the world in education. 

Bill Moyers Journal: 'Hunger in America'

Source:Bill Moyers Journal- a woman who was interviewed for this piece.

"The Public Broadcasting Service (PBS) is an American public broadcaster and television program distributor.[6] It is a nonprofit organization and the most prominent provider of educational television programming to public television stations in the United States, distributing series such as American Experience, America's Test Kitchen, Antiques Roadshow, Arthur, Barney & Friends, Clifford the Big Red Dog, Downton Abbey, Finding Your Roots, Frontline, The Magic School Bus, Masterpiece Theater, Mister Rogers' Neighborhood, Nature, Nova, the PBS NewsHour, Reading Rainbow, Sesame Street, Teletubbies, Keeping up Appearances and This Old House." 

From Wikipedia 

"Bill Moyers Journal looks at shortages in America's food banks. For more information, see:Bill Moyers Journal." 

From Bill Moyers Journal

Hunger or food insecurity which I guess would be the new popular term for people who don't have enough food to eat because they can't afford to buy enough food would be what I would call level three in poverty. I four levels - homeless being the worst and level four. Food insecurity being level three. Unemployed and low-skilled with kids being level two. And employed perhaps full-time and maybe another job on the side, as well as collecting Food Assistance being level one. 

Level one of poverty being the best (if you want to call it that) because these people are workers and have work experience and perhaps a lot of it and perhaps they just need to further their education or receive additional job training at work in order to get a good job and move out of poverty. 

But a problem with food insecurity, is that effects all levels of poverty. If you can't even afford to have a place to live, you probably can't afford enough food as well. And of course if you are food insecure, you don't have enough food to eat. 

If you are on public assistance like Welfare Insurance, you are probably collecting Food Assistance as well. And obviously can't afford enough food to eat on your own. And if you are a low-income, low- skilled worker, maybe you can afford enough food to eat or not. Maybe you are not collecting public food assistance, but you are eating at Church and other community places. And perhaps you collect food from food banks as well. 

With the Great Recession, if anything food insecurity has become a bigger problem in America and people that used to be middle class or upper Middle class workers and are well-educated, have now slipped into poverty and have lost their homes. And are collecting Food Assistance because they've been unemployed for so long. 

I have some ideas in how to solve this problem that gets to temporary food assistance for these people. As well as helping them further their education job training so hungry people no longer need this assistance . But ideas aren't in the New Deal or Great Society area. I'm not a Democratic Socialist.  (As if you didn't already know) 

I don't think in welfare state terms to solve these problems, but I do consider myself a Progressive and would like to see some progress here. My ideas have to do with creating a national system of food centers, at least semi-private in the short-term, that wouldn't be run by the Federal Government as well as non- profit, where each state would have their own food assistance system. 

This system would not be run by government and would be semi-private and non-profit with like a national headquarters. But each state would have their own system and these food centers would be a combination of grocery stores and like cafeteria's, with discounted food, with mostly healthy food, that people who are eligible for them could buy their grocery's, eat their meals, spend their money and use their Food Assistance to help pay for their food. 

This would be where individuals and organizations would be eligible to donate their extra food and other food to a food center that would be located in areas with high food insecurity. As we would set up a food assistance system like this. 

We as a country need to do more for people in poverty so they can get better skills and a better education, so they can get better jobs. And be able to move off of public assistance and into the middle class and to self-sufficiency. So they no longer have to collect from these programs which would make them easier to run.

AEI: 'U.S. Demand for Drugs Fuels Cartels'

Source:AEI- event on the War on Drugs.

"The Drug War's New Front Line: Combating Narco-Criminality in Central America

Third-party photos, graphics, and video clips in this video may have been cropped or reframed. Music in this video may have been recut from its original arrangement and timing.

In the event this video uses Creative Commons assets: If not noted in the description, titles for Creative Commons assets used in this video can be found at the link provided after each asset. 

The use of third-party photos, graphics, video clips, and/or music in this video does not constitute an endorsement from the artists and producers licensing those materials. 

AEI operates independently of any political party and does not take institutional positions on any issues. AEI scholars, fellows, and their guests frequently take positions on policy and other issues. When they do, they speak for themselves and not for AEI or its trustees or other scholars or employees.

More information on AEI research integrity can be found here:AEI." 

From the American Enterprise Institute

If you look at the reasons why America still has a so-called War on Drugs and why narcotics are still a problem in America forty years after President Nixon officially launched the so-called War on Drugs in America, I believe its pretty simple and two reasons: the way we fight the so-called War on Drugs and how ineffectively we've been at it. As well as Mexico and the large demand in America as Mexico two huge countries, two of the largest countries in the world physically and in population. 

The combine population of both America and Mexico is roughly 430M people. And you are also talking about two of the largest economy's in the world. America still being the largest economy. And these two economy's put together total 16T$ with 430M people. And of course America and Mexico share a two- thousand mile border with each other. Easily one of the largest borders in the world. So there are a lot of resources and demand on both sides of the border to buy heroin, cocaine and meth, and marijuana. 

Marijuana, I and a lot of people would argue not being very dangerous compared with the big  three (cocaine, heroin, meth) for example it can't kill you right away. And again I and a lot of other people would argue that marijuana is as dangerous or as helpful as alcohol and tobacco and should be treated as such. 

America and Mexico, two huge country's that are trying to forcefully eliminate narcotics are actually feeding the problem and keeping narcotics dealers and growers in business by locking up drug addicts and treating them the same drug dealers. And locking these addicts up who have a medical condition in prison where they get no help for their problems and get more drugs while in prison. And if anything get back on the streets with a bigger addiction. 

Mexico has the same issues but they also have a lot of corruption in their Federal Government especially in the law enforcement. And this corruption is a problem not only for Mexico to deal with its so-called drug war, where their officers get paid off by narcotics dealers and gangsters. The good news is the answers to reforming the so-called War on Drugs are fairly simple. 

First of all you stop fighting a fake, so-called War on Drugs and admit that it was a failure and use those resources where we've spent over a trillion-dollars to fight and use them for better things. By decriminalizing marijuana and regulating it like alcohol and tobacco. 

And with heroin, cocaine and meth, separate the addicts from the dealers. Treat addicts like the patients that they are and get them in drug rehab and halfway houses where they would pay for their treatment and stay as well. 

And treat those dealers like the criminals that they are and put them away in prison. 

As I said before, part of the problem with the so-called War on Drugs is about demand: if people want something enough and are addicted to it they'll do whatever they can to get what they want and to hell with the consequences. So if you teach these people that these drugs are horrible for them, they are not going to want them and their dealers will have less customers to deal their dope to.

Paul Ryan: 'Tax Reform is Key to Fixing the Economy'

 

Source:Paul Ryan- U.S. Representative Paul Ryan (Republican, Wisconsin) Chairman of the Budget Committee.

"Paul Ryan goes 'On the Record' to discuss House Budget Committee video & need for tax reform." 

From Paul Ryan

I believe everyone on the American political spectrum believes that America needs tax reform at the Federal level. It's just a question of how to do it. 

Socialists believe that we should have tax reform that closes a lot of loopholes and also raises rates on everyone, to provide a lot more public services. Which they believe would benefit the economy for everyone. 

Conservatives believe in the flat tax (a middle class tax hike) basically one Tax Rate for everyone or perhaps just three rates. There are also Conservatives that believe in what's called a fair tax, which is a consumption tax taxing what people spend money on. Rather than taxing money that they make. That tax if done right I as a Liberal would be in favor of as well. 

Liberals believe in simplifying the tax code, closing tax loopholes and lowering tax rates in exchange. 

Libertarians, some believe in eliminating the tax code all together and having no Federal taxes. Others who I believe are adults and reasonable, believe in the fair tax, something that Gary Johnson is running on for President ironically in the Republican Party, even though he's a Classical Liberal, but thats a different post that I've already written. 

So there's broad agreement for the need for tax reform in America and its a matter of how to do it. But I believe there's at least one step that has to be done first before we have tax reform figuring out exactly what the Federal Government should be doing. And then how much money through taxes should we raise to fund the Federal Government and then can we afford to do it for the economy and our broader fiscal policy. 

If you want the Federal Government to do more, then you are going to have to raise more money to pay for that or get the economy strong enough to pay for it. If you want the government to do less, then you have to figure out what to reform or cut and based on that how much lower taxes will be. 

I have a two step plan that I've laid out in previous posts that I call government reform. 

First step is reforming the Federal Government to get it back to doing the things that only it can do. And that at least historically has done very well and been efficient and just by reforming the Federal Government and making it work better, you would make it smaller and cheaper with a smaller workforce, whether thats your goal or not. 

My goal in this is to make it more effective and efficient which would make it cheaper and smaller. And to give you a few examples of this: decentralization, independence and consolidation. (Or DIC, if you prefer) But also some reforms as well, but I think DIC sounds better so I'm going with that. 

Decentralization, take all of our social insurance programs and pass them down to the states. But not for the states to run and this is where independence comes in. Each State would have their own system in how these programs operate, that would have to meet basic Federal standards. But each of these programs would be semi-private, non-profit, self-financed community services, and each state would have their own version of each these programs to address the needs that they work on for the people of their state. 

Consolidation - the Interior Department, Energy Department, and Agriculture Department into one new Department of Natural Resources. Take the Public Health Service out of the Health Department including NIH and make it and independent service. And put the Education Department and combine it with the Department of Human Services that would become a regulator of the community services in America. Reform, pull all of our Armed Forces out of developed nations that can afford to defend themselves and put that money into deficit reduction.

And after that the Federal Government would have saved a lot of money and not need a Federal budget of 3.7T$, because we would have saved 200B$ a year alone in defense. About 1.5T$ in Social Security and Medicare because the Federal Government would no longer be running these services. Each State would have their own system for them that would be self-financed, the FEDS would regulate them instead. 

I believe this plan would save the Federal Government and Tax Payers about 2T$ a year. And then I would move to tax reform, eliminating most if not all tax loopholes, but I would settle for most. And then have a consumption tax, taxing consumption instead of income. With low rates on the essentials that people need to survive and higher rates on luxury items. And keeping the same tax credits that are aimed at helping the working poor.

Euro News: 'Iran Due to Inaugurate First Nuclear Power Plant'

Source:VOA News- a member of the Iranian opposition.

"Euronews is a pan-European pay television news network, headquartered in Lyon, France. The network began broadcasting on 1 January 1993 and aimed to cover world news from a pan-European perspective.

It is jointly owned by several European and North African public and state-owned broadcasting organizations, and is currently majority-owned (88%) by Media Globe Networks, led by Egyptian billionaire Naguib Sawiris, who is the chairman of the supervisory board. It is also a provider of live streaming world news, which can be viewed via its website, on YouTube, and on various mobile devices and digital media players." 

From Wikipedia 

"Iran's first nuclear power plant is due to be officially inaugurated today amid ongoing concern about the country's nuclear ambitions. Some are also worried about a possible nuclear race in the region. Analyst and critic of the Iranian President, Saeed Laylaz, said: "In this atmosphere, it can bring or it can start a nuclear race, a race in the Middle East to have nuclear power for military purposes and so on. Euro News." 

From Euro News

Iran opening a nuclear plant, there's probably not much that the United States, Israel or the European Union, all countries that of course doesn't want to see the Islamic Republic obtain nuclear weapons, can do to stop them. It wouldn't be irresponsible to bomb a nuclear plant in a foreign country, just because it's a nuclear plant. You would cause a lot of damage killing a lot of innocent people. 

Now if you know that Iran has nuclear weapons in it and that information is clear with other countries understanding that, then that would be a different story, but hopefully Iran is actually building nuclear power for their economy and not for nuclear weapons. But with how badly they've managed their economy the last thirty years, we shouldn't take their word on that.

It's easy to be skeptical about Iran because this is a country thats also deep in natural resources, oil as well as natural gas, they also have a middle class an an educated class. Iranians are generally well-educated, but this is a very large country of 75M people thats still a developing country with high unemployment and poverty. 

Iran is still a developing country that if anything has taken steps backwards since the Islamic Revolution of 1979, with high poverty rate and high unemployment, with an educated workforce. And a lot has to do with the fact that the Islamic Republic spends a lot of their vast resources sponsoring terrorists who support their cause and would like to establish other Islamic theocracies in the Middle East. 

Iran has made it clear that they want to the superpower of the Middle East, just not economically apparently. By the way they've managed their economy, the way their government is set up, how they treat their democratic opposition, that has the education to lead this large country and get their economy going again, by essentially freeing its people to run their economy and put their vast natural resources to work for the country and not just for the regime. And to free the people of Iran to live their own lives and put the skills that they obtain to use to benefit the country. 

Iran is way too big to invade and occupy, especially by one country but even for an international coalition. Iran is three Iraq's both physically and in population. So and invasion and occupation of Iran is almost completely off the table especially for the United States. 

But letting Iran obtain nuclear weapons can't be an option either. Whether they get them in the end or not and they may very well get them in the end, they'll probably get the technology for them and since it's such a large country will probably be able to hide them pretty effectively. 

But what the Arab League, perhaps Pakistan, and India as well, as well as the European Union and United States can do is to support the democratic opposition in Iran, financially and in with other resources. And perhaps through a coalition of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Turkey, maybe even Pakistan, and India as well, take out any nuclear weapons that Iran successfully obtains if they are successful. After all peaceful options are exhausted, through the air destroy Iran's nuclear weapons through the air if they obtain them. 

The Islamic Republic of Iran now has a nuclear plant and hopefully thats to benefit their economy and people. And perhaps to a small extent it is, but the international community, can't allow the Islamic Republic to obtain nuclear weapons especially to fund their terrorists allies.