CHRIST JESUS SAVE US ALL! According to the most terrifying press release we’ve ever received, Stacey Lawson has announced the formation of her “Mendocino County Leadership Cabinet,” not one of whom has the slightest influence with any more or less cognizant Mendo Person but there’s an ongoing debate as to the reach of cognizance in the county. A thousand votes gets you elected in Willits, 150 gets you Harwood on the Laytonville School Board.
A ZILLIONAIRE candidate for Congress in the reconfigured Northcoast Congressional district, Lawson, who has seldom voted and is a follower of an East Indian mumbo jumbo man, has predictably galvanized a kind of Who’s Who of MendoFeeb in her attempt to buy herself a seat in Congress — not the first person to make that attempt, of course , but this screwball has the dough to bring it off. Take a big pile of money, add “spirituality,” and they all come running!
MARY ANNE LANDIS, Mayor of Ukiah; Mari Rodin, Former Mayor of Ukiah; Bruce Burton, Mayor of Willits; Ron Orenstein, Willits City Council Member; Jim Little, Laytonville Fire Department Chief; Calvin Harwood, Laytonville School Board President; Mike Anderson, Mendocino Farm Bureau President, Fort Bragg; Michael Braught, Mendocino Farm Bureau Vice President and Long Valley Market owner, Laytonville; Jody Cole, Wild Rainbow African Safaris, and Katharine Cole, Victory Campaign Board member, Ukiah; Art Harwood, Triple Bottom Line Solutions, Branscomb; Jim and Barbara Hurst, Business Owners, Fort Bragg; Judith Bailey, Bailey’s Incorporated, Laytonville; Chris Neary, Attorney at Law, Willits; Steve Zuieback, Founder & CEO of Synectics, Ukiah
NATCH WE get an unmoored and utterly meaningless quote in support of Lawson from Ukiah’s sagacious mayor, Mary Anne Landis: “Stacey Lawson is the candidate who can help us make more in Mendocino County. Along with her strong business background and great people skills, she’s energetic and focused on promoting sustainable solutions to issues we face around economic development. She’s just the woman we need to represent us in Washington.”
WHAT’S SAD about Landis’s statement, nevermind a candidate for high office dumb enough to share the sentiment, is that “strong business” backgrounds have brought us where we are: broke and millions of Americans squeezed if not doomed. This person is much less qualified than, say, Chesbro and Thompson, who at least understand how utterly corrupt things are and simply play ball to stay in office, aware that in a just world they’d be delivering pizzas.
WHAT WE’RE SEEING here in the Lawson campaign and this fatuous advisory group is an object lesson in how to buy public office. Will Mendocino County voters go for it? Evidence from elections past aside, I don’t think so.
OBAMA on Pot Policy (from last week’s Rolling Stone Magazine Interview):
ROLLING STONE MAGAZINE: “Let me ask you about the War on Drugs. You vowed in 2008, when you were running for election, that you would not ‘use Justice Department resources to try and circumvent state laws about medical marijuana.’ Yet we just ran a story that shows your administration is launching more raids on medical pot than the Bush administration did. What's up with that?”
OBAMA: “Here's what's up: What I specifically said was that we were not going to prioritize prosecutions of persons who are using medical marijuana. I never made a commitment that somehow we were going to give carte blanche to large-scale producers and operators of marijuana — and the reason is, because it's against federal law. I can't nullify congressional law. I can't ask the Justice Department to say, ‘Ignore completely a federal law that's on the books.’ What I can say is, ‘Use your prosecutorial discretion and properly prioritize your resources to go after things that are really doing folks damage.’ As a consequence, there haven't been prosecutions of users of marijuana for medical purposes. The only tension that's come up — and this gets hyped up a lot — is a murky area where you have large-scale, commercial operations that may supply medical marijuana users, but in some cases may also be supplying recreational users. In that situation, we put the Justice Department in a very difficult place if we're telling them, ‘This is supposed to be against the law, but we want you to turn the other way.’ That's not something we're going to do. I do think it's important and useful to have a broader debate about our drug laws. One of the things we've done over the past three years was to make a sensible change when it came to the disparity in sentencing between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. We've had a discussion about how to focus on treatment, taking a public-health approach to drugs and lessening the overwhelming emphasis on criminal laws as a tool to deal with this issue. I think that's an appropriate debate that we should have.”