We Democrats are at our worst when we try to emulate Republicans as we did in signing onto the “war” on drugs that has ruined so many young lives. The cruelty of the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984 is stark indeed, as are the sentencing guidelines that impose mandatory minimum sentences for minor drug possession—guidelines in the 1986 Anti-Drug Abuse… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (47)Page 1 of 1 pagesWhile I agree the war on drugs is stupid, counter productive and a few more adjectives I could come up with, Keillor should stick to his humor and leave serious topics to non-Wobegoners.
The war on drugs is not due to some “religious war”. It is, to put it in terms he might understand, a product of the “Good Intensions Paving Company”.
We need to convince rational people that this drug policy is only making criminals rich and ordinary citizens into criminals.
His hyperbolic story telling only serves to diminish the argument that we should put an end to this waste of time, money and worst of all people’s lives.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 2, 2005 at 8:30 AM Keillor should stick to his humor and leave serious topics to non-Wobegoners.
God, please no! We all breathe a sigh of collective relief when he is away on the road…
Posted by Jay Cline on Nov 2, 2005 at 9:12 AM It would be interesting to see Steve’s response to this article.
Seems that the laws are rather recent - and the quote: “That includes Bill Clinton, under whose administration the prosecution of Americans for marijuana went up hugely, so that now there are more folks in prison for marijuana than for violent crimes.” makes me wonder if he was a closet fundamentalist? (Kidding!).
I hate it when i agree with the conclusion of an article like this, but find that the attempted argument is terrible. But i should be more generous - Keillor was probably very high when he wrote it. :)
Posted by wolf on Nov 2, 2005 at 11:14 AM Now that more and more people are realizing the utter stupidity of these laws,what can be done about it?
Posted by Dr.D on Nov 2, 2005 at 2:46 PM Here is how i would start. Perhaps others have useful ideas as well. . .
Write your Congressmen. Write letters to the editor (polite and cogent - starting the war of words is counterproductive).
Posted by wolf on Nov 2, 2005 at 2:51 PM The marijuana issue can be solved by simply removing the incentive for the crime - its profitablility.
Cannabis is a weed that grows everywhere with no care or cultivation needed. Thus its cost from a producers point of view is zero. Currently, the income from a sale at the street level is huge.
Why is that?
It’s because your friendly neighbourhood dealer has to assume huge risks, primarily to his own safety and freedom, in order to supply you with your little buzz. In effect, your dealer insulates you from incarceration and all its unpleasantness. That is actually what you are paying for.
So, if you could eliminate the middle man and grow your own dope yourself without the fear of the narcs throwing you in jail, you could get buzzed for nothing.
This would of course immediately result in all sorts of little herbal retailers going out of the business and having to look for other sources of income. It would also remove billions from the income of the various criminal networks that have been set up as a direct consequence of the government’s decision to make marijuana illegal.
The interesting twist on this situation is that a smart prosecutor could probably convict the government of RICO violations since the government created the necessary conditions which resulted in all of these illegal marijuana activities happening in the first place.
Dandelions can be smoked with no problems except the medical ones. If dandelions were declared to be a drug in the same manner as cannabis, the market would be huge, criminal, and the pushers made rich by the government’s actions. Too cool.
Posted by dugjakes on Nov 2, 2005 at 3:56 PM Sorry Wolf,
“Write your Congressmen. Write letters to the editor (polite and cogent - starting the war of words is counterproductive).”
I have written far more letters to Congressmen over the past 30 years than most people —
result: zero
conclusion: As an individual they don’t “hear” you. Only those dreaded “special interest groups” get noticed.To be fair there is no way anyone in office can possibly keep up with the volume of communication.
Ther is no such thing as a truly representative form of government anymore. (If in fact there ever was.)
That is why I am writing to site like this. It won’t change anything either, but I get it off my chest and feel better. And I have a bit of fun stiring the pot once in a while — at least I know someone has read it when LB or Rabbit slips into name-calling mode.
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 2, 2005 at 5:12 PM I don’t call you names WTH, I merely insinuate. I am just happy to be helping you overcome your alienated, depersonalized condition and feelings of helplessness. Don’t lie, it makes you feel alive when I shred your arguments, doesn’t it? A little flushed, a little passionate; it’s a natural high, no?
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 2, 2005 at 9:53 PM But seriously folks, the War on Drugs is the biggest scam in history. If it weren’t for prohibition, illegal drugs would be cheap as dirt. No money for the smugglers and corrupt officials who get the bonanza profits, or the mob distributors who make the big volume sales (contrary to popular belief, most street dealers are not rolling it in. Just like everybody else at the bottom of the heap, except they avoid lots of taxes and paperwork, don’t have a boss, and can more or less set their own hours). Set up controlled and reliable harm reduction and rehab centers and the destructive behaviors of drug addicts will be greatly diffused. Remove the forbidden fruit fascination and honestly reveal the cheesiness of the mysterious secret drug world and the numbers of people attracted to mental oblivion will be reduced to minimum. Billions of dollars of taxpayer dough could be put to much better purpose.
But that would be tantamount to condoning drug usage. We can’t do that. We have to fill people with the fear of eternal brimstone, enforce mortal punishment in durance vile. They must be made to feel bad about themselves. That’ll make’em obedient slaves of the given order.
We’ve been trying that approach for how many thousand years, now? Tell me, is it working?
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 3, 2005 at 12:50 AM Confused, Jay. Tell me, what else is new? I’ve given you the benefit of the doubt, Jay. Walked you courteously around the block three times. Chased you off of every stoop and out of every alleyway. And you are still obstreperously oblivious. You’ve become my favorite clown. You’re my Flakey Floont. I love you, man, but you’re dumber than dirt.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 3, 2005 at 1:07 AM I live in British Columbia, Canada. Marijuana is very common here. I think that alcohol is more harmful than marijuana. I enjoy both every now and then.
Our police and courts up here are lenient with marijuana charges and sentencing. The political will to enforce the marijuana laws is weaker every day. The political will to decriminalize or possibly regulate marijuana is stronger every day.
Posted by David in Canada on Nov 3, 2005 at 2:22 AM Jay, I’m beginning to realize you are personally the reason all the Lake Woebegone children are above average. You bring down the curve for the whole state. Ja, you bet!
I spent the summers of my youth roaming the eastern slopes of the Sierras, where the saying was: Where the men are men and the sheep are nervous. I kid you so only because you remind me of a sheep.
(I apologize for the pun)
If you really want to influence your congressman, get a group of like-minded individuals together, write up a simple and clear petition or declaration, and personally deliver it to his/her local office. Yes, be polite and cogent, but more importantly, be sure to flatter and/or flirt with his/her staff.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 3, 2005 at 8:52 AM LB,
In this case I’m not trying to pull the wool over your eyes, just butting in for a very minor correction (well, not really wrong - just less appropriate). Kids are generally offspring of goats and lambs of sheep.
---------------------Are the women in the Sierras rally that repulsive?
Posted by whattheheck on Nov 3, 2005 at 9:46 AM luminous beauty - everything ok? You seem more caustic than normal, but i also get the notion you are more kidding than serious in your posts above. . .
That said, i entirely agree with your recommendation: “If you really want to influence your congressman, get a group of like-minded individuals together, write up a simple and clear petition or declaration, and personally deliver it to his/her local office. Yes, be polite and cogent, but more importantly, be sure to flatter and/or flirt with his/her staff.”
Posted by wolf on Nov 3, 2005 at 10:36 AM I stand corrected, cabron. The gals in rural Nevada are attractive enough. They just tend to be well armed. Puts the cowboys off their game.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 3, 2005 at 10:52 AM Speaking of sheep and goats ... here is a bit of a song by a band called Cake ... the song is called ...
Sheep go to Heaven, Goats go to Hell
Now, I just want to play on my panpipes,
I just want to drink me some wine,
As soon as you’re born, you start dying,
So you might as well have a good time,Sheep go to Heaven,
Goats go to Hell,
Sheep go to Heaven,
Goats go to Hell,
Posted by David in Canada on Nov 3, 2005 at 11:20 AM I am sure that Luminous Beauty meant it in the most friendly way possible :
hee hee
Posted by David in Canada on Nov 3, 2005 at 11:27 AM I for one am happy when Mr.Keillor,or anyone for that matter brings up the issue in a public way.Especially Mr.keillor as he has a wide audience that normally might not Even ever think about the current prohibition problems.Adding numorous more people who will research,and make their own voices heard as well.Making the numbers of the exsisting groups like “the Drug Policy Alliance","the Marijauna Policy Project’,"Normal""the Media Awareness Project","the U.S.Marijauna Party"and Jays’ Favorite “Law Enforcement Against Prohibition"also Know as LEAP.To name but a few.
Luminous Beauty,as it has been said so many times before,you are both Lum,inous and beautiful! And your very funny too! I’m Glad I was able to remind you of that song!I like it as well. :-)
Posted by Kaw Valley Kid on Nov 3, 2005 at 4:57 PM I think ‘whattheheck’ is a bit harsh and overly critical of Keillor in his first posting ("Keillor should stick to his humor and leave serious topics to non-Wobegoners"). For starters, it is a good thing that such a celebrity as Keillor is taking a stand publicly on the drug war issue in a realistic way; far too many celebrities in the entertainment field are afraid of hurting their bottom line and as a result stay conspicuously quiet on pressing issues of the day. Also, I think whattheck is wrong in saying Keillor is incorrect in claiming this issue to be a ‘religious war’. To the contrary it is quite easy to construe the ‘war on drugs’ to be a religious war: Reagan, long a champion of the religeous right started the war on drugs. Further, the war on drugs is most assiduously pressed by religious conservatives who, by the way are prohibitionists from waaaaay back to prohibition. And, just like in the old South you have dry counties, of course they like to have no drugs as well. So, as you can see the war on drugs IS in fact a religious war, just like abortion is. It is a part of the larger ongoing conflict in this country between secular humanists vs. fundamentalist christians.
Posted by Slamboni on Nov 3, 2005 at 5:20 PM If anyone has a few bucks to spare
these folks could use your help keeping the investigative spotlight on the cruel absurdities of the War on Drugs.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 4, 2005 at 11:42 AM WOLF, if by “Steve” in your first post, you were reefering to me, here’s my response. (If not, here it is anyway...heh)
You aptly note that most of the insane sentencing enhancements have been passed only during the past 20 years. Actually the bulk were passed between 1985 and 1998. There’s been very little public support for making them any more crazy during the past 5-7 years because the citizenry is becoming so much more educated about how futile such sentencing is, how irrational it is and how such sentencing is far more destructive to the offender and to the community than was the actual or perceived damgage they caused by their choice to use and/or distribute illicit drugs.
While general marijuana possession laws have been eased in 12 states and medical marijuana possession has been legalized in ten states and four separate municipalities, the enhanced sentencing permits a prosecutor to really jam it to a marijuana offender if any of a variety of rather obtuse factors are present. Keillor noted one such scenario with the “gun in the closet” analogy.
In a perverse way, these destructive policy decisions passed during Reagan/Bush and faithfully enforced during Clinton/Bush2 will serve to be a key contributor towards ending 21st century drug Prohibition as we now know it. That’s because even after these stern and draconian responses to drug possesion and illegal trafficking have brought the intensity of the War on (some) Drugs to it’s highest level in 35 years, illicit drugs are easier to obtain by the consumer; imported in higher quantities than ever; cheaper (vs inflation) than anytime in the past 35 years for dose/purity level; and the level of dealing in our neighborhoods and street corners is just as high or higher than at any time in the past 35 years.
Mix in the steady, unreduced level of violence in our residential neighborhoods and inner cities where drug trafficking is most visible; the ever increasing level of police, judicial and other government corruption tied directly to Prohibition and it’s obvious to more Americans daily that continuing 21st century drug Prohibition is a no-win strategy.
Posted by SteveHeath on Nov 5, 2005 at 12:36 AM The inception of all of these ridiculous drug laws(including the three strikes rule) began in New York State in the late 60’s(I don’t know the exact date)with the passage of the “Rockefeller Drug Laws”.Most other states followed in short order,and there has been a downhill slide ever since. When a popular cause presents itself,Politicians will try to outdo their opponents in order to appear more in step with public opinion,for obvious reasons.I can remember this huge media hue and cry for tougher drug laws after Art Linkletters’ kid killed himself in a so called “hallucinogenic haze"brought on by LSD,shortly after,California’s drug laws were stiffened. Career politicians(of which I think should be banned,through term limits)will jump on any bandwagon to get re-elected,hence the predicament that we find ourselves in today.
Posted by Dr.D on Nov 5, 2005 at 8:17 PM Actually, modern drug laws started back with the League of Nations about a half century earlier.
Posted by Jay Cline on Nov 6, 2005 at 6:53 PM Bah!!! Prohibition laws are nonsense, they just make thugs rich! But I have to agree with whattheheck when he says that no one’s listening when we protest. No one’s listening to reason, no one’s attending to the relevant data, no one is willing to question the premise of prohibition laws, which is that you really do not own your body and mind as they belong to “society” or “god”.
By “god” I don’t mean That Which Really brought you about, but the cranky autocrat we’ve anthropomorphized in substitution.
All of the prohibitionists would defecate gold bricks if anyone questioned their right to own and control whatever material wealth they have acquired over their years of life, and yet they have the unreal gall to tell me that I may not own and control my body and mind.
If they want to protect their kids, they should lock the liquor cabinet and PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT THEY’RE DOING AND WHO THEY’RE HANGING OUT WITH!
Duh!
Probably the only way to overcome this foolishness is to continue chipping away at the prohibitionist edifice with continued passage of state and local laws, knowing that overzealous feds will hold up highway funds or some crap in retaliation. It’ll just have to be the sheer weight of all those efforts that change anything. As with other bureaucratic balderdash, it’s gonna be a long slog of patient and often frustrating relentlessness, just to wear it down by glacially slow erosion. Waiting for some flash of insight by the punishment junkies is fruitless. They’ll have to be outmoded and outlasted to death.
So fucking stupid, my kids could get Meth or Ecstasy easier than cannabis! I could do more time for growing an herb than for a rape!
Crazy. Just madness.
Posted by Kuya on Nov 6, 2005 at 7:43 PM Actually Jay, modern drug regulation began here in the good old USA in 1906 with the Food and Drug Purity Act and the 1914 Harrison Act outlawing opiates and Cocaine. Years before the League of Nations was more than a kernel of a notion. Harry J. Anslinger was almost single-handedly responsible for the 1937 Marijuana Tax Act as well as the unilateral effort by the US to make drug prohibition a condition of favorable treaty status. Well after the League had collapsed into meaninglessness. So, what was your point Jay?
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 6, 2005 at 7:44 PM My point was that drug prohibition isn’t something that just recently came about.
Again, thanks for coming to my defense.
Posted by Jay Cline on Nov 6, 2005 at 9:16 PM That’s right, Jay. Good boy! My pleasure, and looking forward to the day when you no longer are in need of assistance.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 6, 2005 at 11:12 PM Before the Rockefeller Laws of the sixties, punishment was more humane in the United States. Basicly,Rockefeller opened the door to the"runaway penal inflation"that we see today.
Posted by Dr.D on Nov 7, 2005 at 5:58 PM WTH Rabbit never calls you names either in the sense that you seem to mean. Rabbit describes the affliction under which you are labouring sometimes, and while these can be sometimes unpleasant labels, if the hat fits, Rabbit feels it should be worn by you. You are the most stubborn person, you have good attitudes to many things but you are so determined to maintain the status quo of your ideas that you often venture into moronic behaviour in order to avoid things. As it happens, when you are actually informed about something you and Rabbit often agree, or at least I can respect your opinion even if I don’t agree. Rabbit has also written to his political reps, and he has fronted a few in person too. As you say, no use.
There was one notable exception. In our last state election, one of the issues was water, this state has it in short supply, (At least here in the city) The current Labour Government, (State is Labour, Federal is Liberal), in West Oz was promising a very expensive and economically disastrous, in my opinion, Desalination plant. With an Energy problem too, this seemed like the most insane idea ever to come out of a West Oz government ever. Rabbit was so concerned he wrote to the Labour and Liberal Parties. Now Labour ignored Rabbit. They are led by an arrogant and confidant lot at the moment. Liberal who really were scratching around for something, latched onto the fact as i pointed out, that while I seldom voted for a major party, I had never voted Liberal in my life. However if they could be smart enough to can the desalination plant and go with one of the two better options, like piping or canal from the Kimberley in the North where we have the biggest Fresh water lake and river in the Southern Hemisphere. The Ord River. Hell it was originally damned and set up as a state water source and is currently just gushing into the sea.
Liberal showed an interest and actually began to take up the issue. I know they recieved very few letters about anything, actually not many people do contact their reps at all I suspect. I know that the State Liberal Party made this the central platform of their campaign, and Rabbit was very pleased with them. Unfortunately they lost, anyway. The issue failed for them, because, they just started mouthing off in support, without having done any homework, and so Labour was able to destroy their arguments with BS and lots of facts and figures which the Libs totally failed to answer in an articulate way. This just shows that had they gotten anywhere with the issue, it would not have meant they were capable of bringing it to pass anyway. The Libs in federal government failed to win an election on a GST as a major issue. (Taxes) They were patntly unable to articulate what the hell a GST was supposed to do or be at the time, and it was obvious to foreign journalists from countries with a GST that they had no idea what they were talking about. later when they came into government they brought a GST in anyway.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 7, 2005 at 6:26 PM The political parties are not looking at issues on their merits. They are chossing what will get them elected. This is complicated by the fact that the opinions of the sheeple are also able to be so easily manipulated by the “Ministry of Information” MSM.
Those who run the Ministry of Information, also own the pollies in the parties, so it is them, not the pollies who usually choose the issues. It really has become just one big entity, the media is long since gone to NWO mode, the governments are bringing the people along in catch up, but the leading force in the process is the media.
Exactly why we should be doing what we can to improve the Internet debate, and the access to truth and the important information. The printed media is losing to us fast, Televison seems to be foundering, if American Idol and Big Brother are not signs of an industry in crisis what is? The internet is the only alternative and by doing all we can here, we may be doing as much as we can. Obviously that includes disseminating the info to those we see on a daily basis. Rabbit does. Most people who come into this little factory to buy Rabbit’s Kayaks are on the internet, and many of them go away with Rabbit’s business card and an internet site url on the back. Many are already well informed too, which is always easy. The remainder are always receptive once we have found common ground which is easy. Rabbit is a nice and friendly and helpful Rabbit and people seem to like him, and trust him. So next step is always, help them to knowledge which will help free them.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 7, 2005 at 6:46 PM Hi Luminous, isn’t it obvious who does not read the threads they are posting on? WTH and JC were on the thread where that little issue they still misread was raised, and they are still labouring under that missaprehension. It is kind of kinky to watch, and Rabbit for one is glad he got that one sorted out, Rabbits being what Rabbits is.
Luckily we are separated by the ethers, because people with their eyes closed but who assume that this means nobody else can see anything either, might do odd things in the imagined darkness. Rabbit assumes this fruit is one you are leaving to ripen?
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 7, 2005 at 6:53 PM Alas Rabbit, the fruit always ripens when it will. All we can do is cultivate; healthy soil, plenty of water, plenty of sunlight, the occasional judicious pruning. It is good that the dazzling duo provide plenty of fertilizer.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 7, 2005 at 8:58 PM The “Beautiful” Lume knows the “mystery” of which Rabbit speaks? The mystery broached by David one time?
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 7, 2005 at 10:20 PM I love a mystery. Does it have to do with free will and change? Karma? Can we talk about it without giving away the farm? Would I be close by saying some seeds when sown land in inhospitable places, others on fallow ground? Or that from a tiny seed the mighty oak does grow? A seed planted in the darkness puts out deep roots and strives toward the light? I need another hint.
It isn’t any mystery that the common troll finds his greatest satisfaction by hijacking a thread away from sense and sensibility and into a flame war arising from his toxic spume. I think WTH made the assertion that you can’t make someone change if he doesn’t want to. I submit everyone changes whether they want to or not, that being the universal nature of existence. Stubborn refusal to face that reality makes one susceptible to overwhelming unconscious forces. This is why the ignorant ones cling so tenaciously to conventional authority. It is an anchor in a storm of uncertainty. If handled with insight and delicacy it is also a lever to apply a gentle influence. Just a little steady unrelenting pressure on their consciences. Every body, even the sociopath, deep inside wants to be a good boy or girl. Everyone caught up in craving desires approval and acceptance. No matter how hard a nut may be, given the right conditions it will crack open of its own nature and begin to grow.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 8, 2005 at 9:36 AM Luminous Beauty
I love a mystery too.
Rabbit is hinting at the mystery where I came right out and asked you directly for the answer. You provided a few more clues and after careful examination I had the answer.
That mystery. Solved for some, still a mystery for others.
Posted by David in Canada on Nov 8, 2005 at 3:29 PM Oooooh! That mystery. Is my face red. Never mind.
Posted by luminous beauty on Nov 8, 2005 at 5:13 PM No worries .... I really enjoyed the interlude you provided.
Posted by David in Canada on Nov 8, 2005 at 5:44 PM Thanks Curious friend. Rabbit thinks it funny to watch and feels that it is interesting because certain remarks are clearly thus slanted. He does it himself, witness Nat the Bat, who by the way is flapping about on God Squad and she poked her fangs in once on Democracy too.
Posted by Rabbit on Nov 8, 2005 at 10:02 PM “So, if you could eliminate the middle man and grow your own dope yourself without the fear of the narcs throwing you in jail, you could get buzzed for nothing. “
How this very fact must terrify our government. How could they possibly leagalize a substance so popular, yet which can be grown in your own home for the mere price of potting soil, and fertilizer?
I often feel that one of the reasons marijuana is illegal and will most likely stay illegal, is that it would hurt so many pocketbooks here in the land where Dollar is god. They can get over $5 a pack for cigarettes in Chicago becuase you can’t grow high quality tobacco in your home. Not so with marijuana.
Simple facts about mj and its smokers… 1. Smokers usually stay indoors, get high, and watch TV. They have little incentive to go spend $6 on a martini when they have a nice little drug they can enjoy for far less money. Bad for the bar\resturant business 2. Smokers drink less than non-smokers. I know very few people who are smokers AND heavy drinkers. Bad for beer/wine/liquor manufacturers. 3. And this, as I’ve always seen it, is the big one...It would be incredibly hard to tax marijuana, since as our poster says you can grow your own for free. Imagine the horror—people growing, using, sharing, and selling to friends who don’t want to grow their own and the government not getting a penny. A veritable threat to the fabric of our society. How could they possibly grind the old saw of taxing it to help addicts (like they do with cigarettes? or is that some form of punishment?), taxing it to defray the whopping costs of medical treatment for increased lung cancer (like they do with cigarettes? Do I get a free lung transplant if I get lung cancer? Is that how that works?) It’s all about taxes and marijuana, rebel drug that it is, doesn’t lend itsself to easy taxation.
Aside from water from private wells, I have a hard time coming up with other consumables that can’t be taxed. And in America if it can’t be taxed, it must be evil.
Posted by CornChip on Nov 14, 2005 at 9:25 PM CornChip, Excellent testimony my friend.
Testify my brother. I too believe in the the freedom to have a private water well. And .. oh, yes, and too grow some marijuana too.
Imagine the horror ... the horror...
One day they may tax you for the raindrops you can catch in your mouth.
Or the pennies on your eyes?
Posted by David in Canada on Nov 14, 2005 at 11:34 PM I think we should all put on our red dress and just say no.
Or maybe Karl Rove should put on his red dress and ask
his daddy the VP IF HE WAS INVOLVED.
Posted by hksdds on Nov 15, 2005 at 10:26 PM .... put on your red shoes and dance the blues
Posted by David in Canada on Nov 15, 2005 at 10:34 PM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Garrison Keillor
- A Foul Tragedy
Democrats fled in the face of danger - We’re Not in Lake Wobegon Anymore
How did the Party of Lincoln and Liberty transmogrify into the party of Newt Gingrich’s evil spawn and their Etch-A-Sketch president, a dull and rigid man, whose philosophy is a jumble of badly sutured body parts trying to walk?
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2005 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
