it looks sort of like a paperclip.....

oh for heavens sake, while the current world's mania for sex in all of its many forms & all of its many abuses, is aggravating enough --the abovenoted is even worse. theres nowhere to even go w/ it. one expects the ridiculous attitude, above, to have been eradicated--& to have been eradicated, among the educated, at least, decades ago. but nope. so how are we gonna reform anything else when we havent even got a working decent foundation?

devo-f'ing-lution, thanx.

absolutely.

i'm just gonna throw out two things:
1/ the decriminalization process needs to include ways for people to get the stuff--whatever it is--prescribed to them. it needs to be clean, it needs to be standardized, it needs to work properly. & the people who receive whichever drug they get need to come in regularly to be reassessed. that way, if something goes wrong it can be stopped immediately. as per: if people are still out there dealing, then those dealers can be given longer & more appropriate sentences. take the money we use foolishly now--for putting a rondelay of addicts & low-end dealers into prison over & over & over & over &, instead, apply it in this manner &, so help me, the country might finally heal.

the lack of compassion in this country over the last three decades, say, always astounds me. was the fallout from the civil rights movement[s] so terrible that we had to become vicious senseless people for ages afterward?

2/ very minor: it's hard to believe all this guy is, is an oxy addict. he shouldnt be shooting people who care about him over opiates. he should be passed out. theres more to this story than meets the everlovin eye. as ever.
--
the war on drugs makes victims of us all. i'm as concerned about the families of addicts--people who get victimized repeatedly & heartwrenchingly--as i am about the addicts themselves. [see, obviously, the abovenoted story.] & i havent even begun to consider crimes of opportunity done to strangers in the service of stealing objects to trade for dope. or the occasional casualties, by which i mean deaths, that occur when the unknowing somehow find their way in the paths of the desperate. how can we possibly consider what we are doing is correct when all of these things still happen?

why is this:
there’s nothing wrong with sex, isolated and for pure pleasure’s sake
our mantra now? i was raised further left than the forward--way further in fact, particularly culturally, & i am certain the way i think is much much more radical than the thinking of most people hereupon. otoh, have we learned nothing from the devastation of HIV? why is it considered currently good to have no more connection to ones sex partners than might a bear in the woods or a mouse or the cliché'd rabbit? theres something very wrong here.

btw, this is a real question. one i would truly like answered. i dont get it. the mainstream does not do well by itself when it usurps, as ever, the most sensational of countercultural tropes while retaining a ridiculously conventional--not to mention shallow--sensibility. & that is, most obviously, whats cooking here. in the long run this silly culture's overwhelming sexual obsession will backfire--probably about the time the current few generations' kids are old enough to turn on their parents--& it's not gonna be pretty, nevermind sexy. but no question will it be deserved.

dude, for fxcks sake, this is life. you wanna up yr game, complaining about what people you think unworthy get will make no difference. instead at least act as if you know whats going on. kid wonder, up there, the quotemaker? did not get where he was--or even is--by superlative talent. he didnt get where he is by staying in providence, RI & complaining either. he invested his effort in all that matters now: networking [is the nicest & simplest way to put it].

any other kind of value you can just forget. from this article i cannot even tell if you can write--all it sounds is, sorry, whiny. but it wouldnt matter if you could write. makes tremendous little difference. what matters is more who you know--but even & much more than that what you do w/ who you know. you need people to think you have something they want & not that what they should want is to hire you to write something for them cos you are so great. they dont care if yr great. in fact, if you are too good all you are gonna do is make them feel inadequate & you will never get hired.

this has been our world at least since its perfect patron saintess, madonna, fxcked her way to being, i dunno, the most recognized woman in the world while having no visible or audible talent whatsoever. at least none other than any other backup dancer--other than that she somehow either read her age like a book or was just lucky to be taken up in it--while, of course, committing the sexual acts that were really powerful peoples [read: mens] interest in her in the first place. that at some time one or two or four or eight of them figured out they could make good money by marketing her would never have even happened had she not decided in advance to provide her coveted good[ie]s. i hope you are hearing me. [as per: i dont mean you need to provide literal sex.]

nor, of course, would it have happened before we decided, as if w/ one single stupid mind, to throw away the values of the previous three decades, more, & anoint greed as the defining quality of our country. that this coincided w/ our trip [& fall. & dive] into reagan america along w/ the many miserable martyred deaths of HIV [not to mention the smaller numbers of entirely too many souls lost to perpetual rehab due to, at the time, entirely much too much drug abuse, mostly coke, by people too mainstream to use any drug for transcendance] & none of this was gonna change any time soon.

but thats a history lesson & too much for a comment. so, if i could, i would leave you w/ the absolutely annoying disharmonic harmonica tones of my next door neighbor [who has created a web series he probably would not acknowledge was based on glee, et al, at all]. not to mention that he often sends out a newsletter about him & it [mostly him] & my prediction that he will do very well & not cos of talent.

if you have to ask it, it's dishonest.

i wish i'd seen this article before commenting on the other one.

brilliant [even for doing the rarest of contemporary things: considering more than only the most obvious & politically expedient side to a problem]. again: brilliant. but most of all--THANK YOU.

i dont know. i feel a whole lot more threatened by this country's drug policy--& its international reach--than i do by some schmuck who had a really wretched kind of cancer & returned to life via a bicycle, the postal service & one or another drug that has been outlawed.

a whole lot of whats wrong w/ this country this minute can be laid directly upon the metaphorical feet of its drug policy. & i dont just mean for drug addicts. open up this worm can & one of the first things you will find are families & friends of the addicted who have been victimized by people who would never have a scintilla of criminality in their beaten hearts were it not for how they are forced to behave by our war on [some] drugs.

you wanna stop crime? end the war on drugs. it wont stop all of it, just maybe three quarters of it. still--it's a start, yes?

another good start: examine yr own very self to see why you agree w/ what has become so many really dangerous--if often politically correct--party lines. it's the LEFT that needs to start dragging individuality back into the culture, back into society, back into the world.

as per lance armstrong:
i dont care about bicycles, i dont care about sports. i dont care about so many of the things his foundation is devoted to bringing to the populace. otoh, i have always wondered how much he could have done w/ his physical self, w/ his specific cancer diagnosis--w/o the drugs that allowed him his life back. ALL of them. chemo, steroids, whatever. i do not actually know this answer. but i have considered this question. too often now people on all sides of the political spectrum make incredible jumps of faith based on media reports & minimal headlines, ie: drugs=bad. it's way past time to think harder than that.