Update

So I thought I would take the time to update everybody on what I have been researching and why I haven't posted anything in a long time. For those of you who may not know, I am currently working on my Master's Degree in Political Science.

Last semester I did three research papers. One was on Brazil's impact in current international relations. It was an interesting topic because recently Brazil has been named one of the BRIC countries by Goldman Sachs (BRIC meaning Brazil, Russia, India and China; now South Africa is sometimes included). This is a list of countries that should make notable gains in the global economy over the next few decades. Brazil has also taken steps to try to place itself in higher standing among the international community. Former President Lula made it a priority to make Brazil appear as an important partner in global affairs. However, some of his plans began to backfire when he chose to go against the United States in the United Nations, instead aligning with Turkey. The United States is so heavily involved in economics of South America that it is counter-productive for a state that wants regional superiority, such as Brazil, to actively take anti-American positions.

My second paper was on foreign policymaking between the Executive Branch and the Legislative Branch. Ever since the creation of the atomic bomb, the Presidency has had complete control over United States foreign policy. In fact, since the beginning of the Cold War, no President has ever been denied Congressional approval of their major foreign policy goals. This is amazing power to be invested in one person and history shows that this is not the way the Founding Fathers intended it to be. "Bomb Power", as historian Gary Wills calls it, changed everything.

My third project was on the necessity of a formal Chinese Grand Strategy. People today often refer to China in regards to its domination over manufacturing and its growing economy. However, most people probably don't realize how close China and the U.S. might actually be a conflict. The United States is currently the global Hegemon, a power with capabilities truly unlike anything the world has ever seen. The PRC is a rising power, experiencing astounding rates of growth along with rising military powers. Historically, rising states will try to challenge the established power through acts of balancing or armed conflict. However, many scholars and experts are not sure if China is like other rising powers of the past. Their intentions appear to be less revolutionary than states of the past meaning conflict is not inevitable. If China were to produce a formal Grand Strategy, outlying its strategic interests and plans for attaining and maintaining its interests, it would tell the rest of the world what kind of rising power China wants to be. Without a grand strategy, it is possible that a security dilemma could occur where China unintentionally creates a situation of military conflict because of a misunderstanding of intent.

Moving in to this current semester, I am taking some of my research from before and adapting it to fit the scope of my current classes. I was fascinated by the research I did into foreign policymaking, so now I am looking at public attitudes towards foreign policy. Specifically, I am looking at gender differences in approval of different types of foreign policy. I am developing a scale for foreign policy, from passive (foreign aid, involvement in the U.N.) to active (spread of democracy, intervention and war) and seeing if there is trend in gender approval across the spectrum.

I am also furthering my research of Grand Strategies. I am curious as to how grand strategies fit into the scheme of international relations theory. After looking at grand strategy as a whole, I will look at China and see how the presence of a grand strategy could affect China as a rising power in regards to international relations theory.

Anyways, I just wanted to give a quick update on the research I have been doing and what I am currently working on. I will try to update more in future with commentaries or short essays on current topics. If anyone is interested in reading any of my full papers let me know and I will send them to you.

Tolerance in Light of Freedom of Speech

There has been something on my mind for quite some time now but I have been waiting for the right situation to express it. The events occurring this week tell me that now is as good a time as any.

Two different sets of circumstances have garnered my attention this week. The first is in regards to the Westboro Baptist Church and the Supreme Court decision to protect their rights to freedom of speech. The situation is as such: the members of the Westboro Baptist Church have become known for staging anti-gay protests in all different sorts of venues, the latest being at military funerals. The Supreme Court upheld the First Amendment by voting 8-1 that the Church members have the right to freedom of speech. In the interest of full disclosure, I agree with the Court’s decision. That does not mean that I agree the Westboro Baptist Church. Anybody who feels that it is God’s will for them to shout things such as “God Hates Fags” or tells a grieving parent that God killed their child because he or she was gay has a poor understanding of the Bible. The New Testament makes it abundantly clear that we are to love one another. It is the central theme to entire second half of the Bible. Love. It was love that God was showing when he sent his Son to die for us. Not just Christians, ALL OF US. Each and every one. God does not show exclusivity in His love, it is meant for all. Needless to say, it is an absurd notion to tell anybody that God hates them. Of course it should be noted that the Westboro Baptist Church is not a real Protestant Church. Almost all of the some 100 members are family of leader Fred Phelps. NPR says, "even though they call themselves Baptist, Mark Potok at the Southern Poverty Law Center says their extreme theology sets it apart from any other church."  As Jon Stewart said, “The Westboro Baptist Church is no more a church than Church’s Fried Chicken is a church.”

However, what worries me is that non-believers will hear what the Westboro Baptist Church says and be turned off to Christianity because of it. I want to make this perfectly clear. People who are true followers of Christ and believe in the Bible do not spew messages of hate. Yes, there are people who will call themselves Christians just as quickly as they will tell you that they and/or God hate you. These people are not only making themselves look bad, but they are making the true nature of God’s Church look bad. Please don’t be too quick to judge Christianity for what some people might believe. Keep in mind that while Christianity in its essence is perfect, Christians are not. Nobody is.

The second story of the week is a little closer to home. Recently, in Yorba Linda, Ca, there was a fairly large protest outside of a Muslim fundraising event. (see video above) According to reports, the protest was originally meant to be against some of the events speakers. However, the protest quickly turned into a hate-fest against Muslims as such slogans as “Muhammad was a pervert,” “Why don’t you go beat up your wife-it’s what you do every night,” and “Get out of here. Go home” could be heard. People who were bringing their families to the fundraiser had to walk through mobs of people shouting such hateful messages at them. Oh, by the way, the fundraiser was meant to raise money build women’s shelters, fight homelessness, and feed the hungry.

Now, what makes this an even more notable situation was that Villa Park City Councilwoman Deborah Pauly and Congressman Gary Miller decided it was appropriate to not only standby the protestors, but also make comments of their own. Pauly said, “I know quite a few Marines who will be very happy to send these terrorists to an early meeting in paradise.” Miller added, “That’s the reason I’m here today to give you a flag. I’m proud of you and what you’re doing.” What is sad is that these people believe they are being patriotic by ridiculing and openly hating Muslims, most of whom were born in the U.S. It’s been almost ten years since the attack on September 11, and people still don’t understand what truly happened that day. Jihad, while mentioned in Muslim teaching is not used in the Islamic majority as a call to violence. It is only the much smaller, radicalized sects of Islam that believe in the use of violence. The odds are way in favor of any Muslims you meet being strictly in favor of peace and nonviolence.

As with the previous topic, don’t let the actions of one fraction of the population lead you to false beliefs about the greater majority. Don’t think that Americans are intolerant and hateful just because some people spew their views under the guise of patriotism. Don’t think that Republicans, (Yes, two Republican Congressmen were in attendance), are the party of hate. This has nothing to do with party ideology and all to do with the individuals. Don’t think that Orange County is a cesspool of hate. Believing that the views of an individual group of people speak for an entire population is just the kind of thinking that went on in the minds of the protestors. I have heard people say they now have a negative view of Orange County. Good luck to those people finding a place that has never had a group of people express views different than their own.  

I suppose the moral of the story is to not jump to irrational conclusions. In all honesty, there are always going to be people who believe that they are in the right to: a. believe hateful things and b. express their views. In my opinion, you can say whatever you want to without causing anyone harm or danger. Do I agree with either of the events listed above? Absolutely not. I believe it shows incredible intolerance, misunderstanding and misguided teachings. However, I do not hate these people either. I feel sad for them. I feel sad that they have such disturbing feelings inside of them and that they feel it is appropriate to yell nasty things at people who probably have never done anything to deserve it. But please, don’t become like them. Don’t take your feelings towards a particular person or group and apply it to the greater whole. It does nothing but sink to their level.

Things we have learned:

1.      Jon Stewart is hilarious.

2.      Just because an individual or small group believes something, doesn’t mean it applies to the greater majority.

3.      Yorba Linda is in North Orange County. Obviously the cool place to be is South Orange County.

4.      The First Amendment includes the right to freedom of speech.

5.      Deborah Pauly and Gary Miller can kiss their political careers good-bye.

6. If you are curious about Islam, read the book No God But God. Fascinating.

Korean Peace Treaty

In light of what is currently happening on the Korean Peninsula, I thought I'd post a peace treaty between North and South Korea that I had to write for class last week. Part II of the Israeli-Iranian Conflict series will be up soon.

PEACE TREATY BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF THE DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA AND THE GOVERNMENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA

The Government of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Government of the Republic of Korea

DETERMINED to provide peace and stability to the Korean Peninsula.

RECOGNIZING the decades of unbridled tension caused from the lack of a settled peace treaty between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea.  

ALLOWING for the possibility of establishing a political entity on the Korean Peninsula that will be a major partner and fellow cooperator on the international scene.

UNDERSTANDING the differences in social and cultural aspects that make up each nation.

BEING desirous to restore the Korean Peninsula to a harmonious state so as to benefit the Korean people.

HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

ARTICLE I

The entirety of the Korean Peninsula shall be a nuclear-free zone free of fissile materials meant for any purpose.

ARTICLE II

To ensure that a nuclear-free region is achieved, both the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea will submit to full and transparent inspections by atomic inspectors from both the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency. These inspections shall be held twice a year, at the discretion of the appointed Inspector General.

ARTICLE III

Inspectors from both the United Nations and the International Atomic Energy Agency shall be granted full, unrestricted access to any area or material deemed necessary by either the United Nations or the International Atomic Energy Agency.

ARTICLE IV

(i)                 In order to maintain the separate identities of the Korean nations yet establish a political entity to unify the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea, there shall be created a Korean Peninsula Committee.

(ii)               The Korean Peninsula Committee shall be made of twenty individuals, ten from each the Democratic Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea.

(iii)             While both the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea will maintain their own sovereignty as a state in the international system, the Korean Peninsula Committee will oversee relations between the two states. Matters concerning relations, be it of any sort, will be brought to the attention of the Korean Peninsula Committee.

(iv)             The members of the Korean Peninsula Committee shall be appointed by their respective governments.

(v)               It is recommended that the Korean Peninsula Committee be headquartered in Gangneung.

ARTICLE V

Both the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea shall not engage or endorse any form of terrorism including but not limited to: selling of weapons; smuggling of weapons; sponsorship or harboring of any known terrorists; or active engagement in state-sponsored terrorism.

ARTICLE VI

The United States shall continue to enact United Nations Security Council Resolution 1874, the searching of cargo vessels owned by the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in international waters. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea shall abide by this resolution and allow their vessels to be boarded and searched. Any materials recognized to be those specified by Resolution 1874 will be confiscated and reported to the United Nations. United Nations Security Council Resolution 1874 shall be rendered null and void three years after the recognized establishment of the Korean Peninsula Committee.

ARTICLE VII

The Demilitarized Zone shall remain in effect. After a period of ten years it may be deemed “essential” or “non-essential” by the Korean Peninsula Committee.

ARTICLE VIII

The Demilitarized Zone between the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea shall be cleared of all land mines. This shall be a joint effort between governments, overseen by the Korean Peninsula Committee. After a period of one year following the creation of the Korean Peninsula Committee, inspectors from the United Nations will determine whether or not the Demilitarized Zone has been properly cleared of all land mines.

ARTICLE IX

The Korean Peninsula shall maintain open borders for those wishing to immigrate or emigrate. Both the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and Republic of Korea shall maintain a separate international passport system, allowing citizens to cross the border. The border shall be policed by public police officers, not military personnel.

ARTICLE X

The United States will guarantee 300,000 metric tons of food to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for the first year after the ratification of this treaty. The People’s Republic of China will guarantee 200,000 metric tons of food as well. Shipments of food shall begin no later than two months after the ratification of this treaty.

ARTICLE XI

Upon compliance with Articles I and II of this treaty, the United States of America will raise its food aid to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea to 500,000 metric tons. Compliance shall be determined by the Inspector General of the United Nations/International Atomic Energy Agency coalition.

ARTICLE XII

Civilian officials from the United Nations shall be able to monitor the distribution of food aid from inside the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea. Failure to allow monitoring of food aid will be deemed “noncompliance”.

ARTICLE XIII

Upon compliance with Articles I and II of this treaty, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea shall receive 350,000 tons of heavy fuel oil, split between the United States of America and the Russian Federation. The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea shall also receive 80,000 tons of fuel equivalents, split between the People’s Republic of China and the Republic of Korea. Compliance shall be determined by the Inspector General for the United Nations/International Atomic Energy Agency coalition.

ARTICLE XIV

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea shall enter into a mutual trade agreement overseen by the Korean Peninsula Committee. This agreement shall maintain minimum levels of tariffs on goods traded between the two states. It shall encourage further economic growth, development and partnership in the Korean Peninsula. It will be to the benefit of the Korean Peninsula and the international community for the economies of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea to flourish in a partnership.

ARTICLE XV

Upon the creation and establishment of the Korean Peninsula Committee, the governments of the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, the State of Japan, and the United States of America will give funds to the Korean Peninsula Committee totaling one billion U.S dollars. This amount shall be split between the governments mentioned in fractions to be determined by these states. The total amount shall be given no later than one year after the confirmed establishment of the Korean Peninsula Committee. These funds will be used at the discretion of the Korean Peninsula Committee.

ARTICLE XVI

The aforementioned states in Article XV of this treaty shall give annual funds to the Korean Peninsula Committee in an amount to be determined by the aforementioned states. This amount shall be contingent on observable growth, development, and proper use of funds on the part of the Korean Peninsula Committee.   

ARTICLE XVII

The six-parties involved in the creation of this treaty shall meet twice a year for the first five years following the ratification of this treaty and then once a year for years prior until deemed unnecessary by all party members. The meetings shall be held in within the second weeks of March and September, unless otherwise agreed upon by unanimous vote. This meeting shall be focused on monitoring the conditions of compliance with the articles of this treaty as well as discussing methods to further the prosperity of the Korean nations.

ARTICLE XVIII

In exchange for compliance with Articles I and II, the Korean Peninsula will be guaranteed a security shield coordinated by the People’s Republic of China and the United States of America. This shield will guarantee protection of the peninsula from forces deemed to be outside of the realm of Korean’s military capabilities. This shall be defensive protection only. The appropriate response to any threat posed on the Korean Peninsula will be determined by special sessions of the six-party talks.

ARTICLE XIX

All foreign military personnel shall be withdrawn from the Korean Peninsula after a period of ten years. There shall be a gradual withdrawal of military personnel accounting to ten percent reduction from the initial amount until all foreign military personnel have vacated the area in the tenth year after the ratification of this treaty. In the tenth year, the six-party talks shall determine whether the Korean Peninsula is self-sufficient for the complete withdrawal of foreign military personnel.

ARTICLE XX

The Korean Peninsula Committee shall oversee the issue of refugees in the Korean Peninsula. Each member state of the six-party talks shall give funds to the Korean Peninsula Committee totaling no more than one hundred million dollars over a period of five years. This fund will be specifically designated for refugee aid and will be confirmed during the biannual six-state talks.

ARTICLE XXI

The Democratic People’s Republic of Korea shall work to abide by the United Nation’s Human Rights Council. The United States shall provide two million dollars to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for promoting human rights. The State of Japan will provide one million dollars for promoting human rights. The Republic of Korea will provide one million dollars to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea for promoting human rights. These funds shall increase by one hundred percent over a five year period, not exceeding four million and two million dollars, respectively, if the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea makes serious progress to promote human rights. Provisions of human rights include but are not limited to: religious tolerance, freedom of speech, freedom of information, political freedom.

Contingent on further human rights progress, the Republic of Korea reserves the right to increase medicinal aid, lower tariffs on imported goods, or reward the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea in another way deemed fit by the Republic of Korea.

ARTICLE XXII

In the interest of preserving national identities, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and the Republic of Korea shall maintain their own national sports teams for international contests.

ARTICLE XXIII

In the interest of chronicling the history and transcendence of Korean culture, a museum of Korean culture shall be created. The Korean Peninsula Committee shall determine the location of the museum no later than one year after the establishment of the committee. The museum shall be subsidized by the Korean Peninsula Committee and thus shall be free to visitors.

ARTICLE XXIV

The two governments recognize the need to create a cooperative environment to further the economies, maintain security, and achieve longevity for the Korean Peninsula.

ARTICLE XXV

The breaking of or noncompliance with any of the aforementioned articles will result in consequences to be determined by the People’s Republic of China, Russian Federation, State of Japan, and the United States of America.

ARTICLE XXVI

This treaty shall enter into force upon signature and shall remain in force for a period of thirty years and it shall be renewable on the basis of mutual consent.

Understanding Ahmadinejad

This is Part I in a series entitled The Israeli-Iranian Conflict.

Part I: Understanding Ahmadinejad

Undoubtedly one of the most prominent, and polarizing, figures on the international political scene is Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. For someone garnering so much attention in terms of international security, it's surprising how little people know about him and his beliefs.

The first thing to know, and something that will come up again, is that Ahmadinejad comes from a very religious family. His last name was originally Saborjhian until his father officially changed it to Ahmadinejad, which means "virtuous race" or "Muhammad's race," (Hitchcock, 24). While at the University of Sciences and Technology, (where he ultimately would receive his Ph.D in traffic management), he became involved with the student political movement following Ayatollah Khomenei. He was an active participant in the Iranian Revolution of 1979 where Khomenei came to power after overthrowing the Shah and establishing the world's first theocracy. The country would from then on be officially recognized as the Islamic Republic of Iran. Mahmoud would become Mayor of Tehran in 2003 and he earned himself the nickname of "The Little Streetsweeper."

In the 2005 Presidential race, Ahmadinejad took an interesting approach to his campaign. With little name recognition throughout the country, Ahmadinejad was seen as a non-factor candidate and Hashemi Rafsanjani was the clear front-runner. Going into the election virtually absent from pre-polling, somehow Ahmadenijad managed to garner enough votes to force a runoff election between him and Rafsanjani. In the runoff, Ahmadinejad won handidly, receving 17 million out of 27.5 million total votes, (Hitchcock, 22). Now, although no official investigation was installed, it is important to understand that Ahmadinejad had the backing of Ayatollah Khamenei, successor to Ayatollah Khomenei.

 It is an understood fact that the Ayatollahs are actually the controlling bodies in Iranian Government and that the President is generally a puppet. However, Ahmadinejad has become something of a symbol for fundamentalism in the Middle East. Not that he is entirely irreplacable, (the Ayatollah was outwardly critical of some of Ahmadinejad's nuclear rhetoric), but he fits nicely into Khamanei's ultimate plan, which will be discussed at a later time.

Ahmadinejad is a follower of a sect of Shiite Islam called Twelver Shiism. While Twelvism will be discussed in detail in Part II of this series, it is important to know that it is the religion of those in control of Iranian government. There are two main sects of Islam, Sunnis and Shiites, and each sect has it's own separate sects. The three main sects of Shiism are based on the number of Imams that were believed to have followed Muhammad. Twelvers represent the majority view in Iran. Ahmadinejad is considered a fundamentalist in the sense that he actively seeks to implement his religious views upon others and into his government policies. (Yes, building nuclear weapons does fit with his beliefs).

Although President Mahmoud Ahmadinejd has done and said a number of noteworthy things, perhaps none is more important than when he threatened Israel by saying he wanted to see it "wiped off the map," (The Economist, 2007). This was really the beginning of the current state of the Israeli-Iranian crisis, which in my opinion is currently the most pressing international issue. He has gone further by saying he foresees a world without the Great Satan and Little Satan, (the U.S and Israel, respectively), and ends of his U.N addresses with a prayer to hasten the coming of the Mahdi, (to be explained later).

There is a lot more that can be said about Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, but I just wanted to provide a brief introduction  to the man so that the next topic of eschatology can be understood easier.

Things we have learned:
1. The Iranian President is Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
2. Ahmadinejad is a very religious man.
3. Iran is actually controlled by Ayatollah Khamanei, who handpicked Ahmadinejad.
4. Ahmadinejad has threatened to wipe Israel off the map.

Next Time: The Eschatology of Ahmadinejad 

Works Cited
Hitchcock, Mark. The Apocalypse of Ahmadinejad. Multnomah Books, 2007.
“Next Stop Iran?” The Economist. 10 February, 2007

Election Day

So today is election day, where people all throughout the country are voting for Governors, Senators, Representatives, and the hundreds of Propositions that most people have never heard of. There are three big subjects to the California election this year: Governor, Senator, and, of course, Prop. 19. The problem, however, is that these have become three completely ridiculous races. Let's look at each and see where we went wrong.

The Governor's race has become nothing more than a farce on itself. Watching the debates and listening to the different campaigns, it has become fairly evident that neither of these candidates truly deserves to be in office. Lets take both sides for a second. The fact that the Republican party had to decide between Meg Whitman and Steve Poizner for its candidate is a sad look at the state of the GOP. Even across the country, there are no strong Republican leaders that are making their mark on the political scene. Whitman has shown absolutely no sign of having a real plan for governing a state in crisis. She has kind of taken the Obama approach at campaigning, spouting a lot of ideals but not giving the public anything to really digest. Of course, Obama was ahead in the polls by election day which is something Whitman does not enjoy.

The Democrats, on the other hand, had to go with Jerry Brown. Again. Take this into account: Good ol' Moonbeam didn't even have to put up a primary campaign until weeks before the election because there was NOBODY else making even a scratch at the Democratic nomination. Now, during the campaign season I've found that Brown has been much more honest and direct, especially during the debates in which Whitman appeared to be bound only to her talking points. However, Brown doesn't leave me with a warm feeling that everything is going to be okay if he becomes Governor. Brown's campaign also makes more relevant the Lieutenant Governor's race because of his age; yet nobody has paid any attention to this part of the race.

Honestly, I would love to see a candidate run on the platform of only showing ads about themself instead of attack ads on the other candidate. Yes attack ads can be effective, but they always leave a sour taste in my mouth for the candidate who pays for them. Give me someone who just runs on the sincerity of their ideas and their plans. That would be a candidate worth voting for.

The Senate race is even worse. I completely agree that Barbara Boxer has been in office way too long for someone with a not-so-good track record. I frankly don't care for either of California's Senators. However, do I want Carly Fiorina to be the one to replace her? I don't think so. I mean, did anybody see Fiorina's Demon Sheep ad??? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRY7wBuCcBY       Anybody who creates an ad like this, for any reason, should not be in Government. That's not to say that I like Boxer's opera ad either.

As for Prop 19, the legalization of marijuana, people need to understand that this is a moot issue. Marijuana is a federal law, meaning the state has no authority to legalize it. The Obama administration has already said that they take it to the Supreme Court if they have to in order to make sure marijuana stays illegal. And really, I know that we're in a budget crisis here, but is the right answer to legalize something that is illegal just to tax it? Even such, if it did pass and somehow found its way to total legality, the current proposition would make it the responsibility of the cities and counties to tax it and regulate it. This is just chaos waiting to happen.

The point is that all of the major components of this election year are not setting California up for healing. None of the candidates running, for any office, appear like they are ready to make an honest-to-God difference. This is shaping up to be one of those "lesser-of-two-evils" elections, but frankly I don't want to have to decide between a lesser of two evils. Everywhere I go I see people telling me to "GO VOTE," but I say, "Give me something worth voting for and I will." Call me a disgruntled voter if you want, but if it is my civic right to vote, it is also my civic right to hold my vote for someone who is worthy of it. When I vote today, it will be because of issues such as Prop 23. Who then will I vote for? Count me in for a big NONE OF THE ABOVE.


I'd like to end each blog post with a brief summary of what I wrote about.
1. This election is an example of the degraded state of California political parties.
2. If you didn't watch it, you need to watch Carly Fiorina's Demon Sheep ad.
3. You can't legalize marijuana through a state initiative.
4. Meg Whitman is going to have wasted A LOT of money after today.
5. There needs to be a "none of the above" box on ballots.