If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Thanks to Gary Johnson and the potheads, Colorado could get all nadered-up next Tuesday   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 230
    More: Spiffy, Colorado, potheads  
•       •       •

3750 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Nov 2012 at 10:59 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



230 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-03 04:26:15 PM

Blue_Blazer: rthanu: Blue_Blazer: What about what I posted above from the L.A. Times? I know it's just some reporting claiming to repeat what Holder said, but if it's true, then what? Will you concede that the ones being busted are the ones breaking local laws and not just the ones that Mr. Sinister Obama decided to bust because he's a mean lying poopyhead?

Yes. I was posting what I posted while yours was posted. I concede that Obama is not as anti pot as his predecessors.

How about you tone down the Mr. Sinister Obama blah blah blah... Tell me where I came within a mile of saying anything about that. I'm voting for him, I like him, I agree with him more often than not.

I have to be honest. I feel more more aligned with the left than the right, but I don't agree with the left 100% of the time. Those rare times that I do disagree with the left and I vocalize it, I get shiat on by the rest of you like I'm just as bad as tenpoundsocheese. It's disheartening. Knock it off.

I appreciate your willingness to do exactly what you said and withdraw your argument, and I was just using "Mr. Sinister Obama" as pure hyperbole. But Mr. Sinister is one of my favorite Marvel villains and I would sincerely like to have a picture of Obama as him. Not kidding a bit.


And I was perhaps tough on you, but I've seen this same argument in this thread about ten times (not saying it was you every time) and so yeah I did want to see an actual response, which you willingly gave and I graciously accept.
 
2012-11-03 04:30:59 PM

HeartBurnKid: Fart_Machine: HeartBurnKid: Obama has stepped up marijuana enforcement, if anything; medical dispensaries have been closed down at a greater rate than under Bush.

Personally I have no problem with making marijuana legal and putting the same restrictions on it that we have on tobacco. Having said that, here in California medical dispensaries have been their own worst enemies. Voters enacted Prop. 215 based on compassion for medical users. Medical dispensaries popped up like crazy and without proper regulation instead of cancer and glaucoma patients you had a bunch of eighteen year old kids with prescriptions for "back pain" which fed into the arguments of the opponents and got the Fed and local authorities cracking down on them.

Look, just make the shait legal already but until then police your own industry.

My mom uses medical marijuana to help her with the pain caused by her arthritis and her lupus. There's a ton of other stuff it's good for, too. If you think that cancer and glaucoma patients are the only ones that need it, you're the problem, not the dispensaries.


/facepalm.

Is that seriously what you got out of what I said? Really?
 
2012-11-03 04:39:33 PM

Blue_Blazer: Blue_Blazer: rthanu: Blue_Blazer: What about what I posted above from the L.A. Times? I know it's just some reporting claiming to repeat what Holder said, but if it's true, then what? Will you concede that the ones being busted are the ones breaking local laws and not just the ones that Mr. Sinister Obama decided to bust because he's a mean lying poopyhead?

Yes. I was posting what I posted while yours was posted. I concede that Obama is not as anti pot as his predecessors.

How about you tone down the Mr. Sinister Obama blah blah blah... Tell me where I came within a mile of saying anything about that. I'm voting for him, I like him, I agree with him more often than not.

I have to be honest. I feel more more aligned with the left than the right, but I don't agree with the left 100% of the time. Those rare times that I do disagree with the left and I vocalize it, I get shiat on by the rest of you like I'm just as bad as tenpoundsocheese. It's disheartening. Knock it off.

I appreciate your willingness to do exactly what you said and withdraw your argument, and I was just using "Mr. Sinister Obama" as pure hyperbole. But Mr. Sinister is one of my favorite Marvel villains and I would sincerely like to have a picture of Obama as him. Not kidding a bit.

And I was perhaps tough on you, but I've seen this same argument in this thread about ten times (not saying it was you every time) and so yeah I did want to see an actual response, which you willingly gave and I graciously accept.


It's not that you were extra mean or anything. It's just that if I disagree with Democratic policy X or things that the Fark left takes as gospel(Libertarianism = Somalia) that I'm automatically a rightist or "Fark Independent" or Libertarian or whatever else. It's not that I'm butthurt about it(maybe I am it's hard to be perfectly self reflective) I just get worn down by it a bit.
 
2012-11-03 04:40:22 PM

joonyer: Kevin72: joonyer: Oooh, Nader as a perjorative. You're SO edgy, subs!

Yes Nader is a pejorative. While 12 years later he is probably not the most hated man in America, it will not be forgotten that Nader gave the keys to the white house to the man who was vacationing in Crawford until the DAY BEFORE 9/11, lost the war on terror to clusterfark up Iraq, and put flushed our economy down the toilet after putting it in the toilet.

LMAO. Yes, all a guy's fault just for running for office. Brilliant.

Yes, it's a truly horrible thing to run for office, and for people to vote their conscience. Who would ever want people to do such a thing?

Keep rootin' for "your team". No matter how rigged the game is.


"Voting one's conscience" would make sense but for the fact that the Green Party's conscience is environmentalism, their raison de être. And the Democratic candidate, Al Gore, had done more to promote environmental issues in one month than Ralph Nadir did in a lifetime. So we get the most anti-environmental administration ever instead. But you know, both sides are bad, so vote Republican or Green, or Libertarian, just not Democratic.
 
2012-11-03 04:43:28 PM

Fart_Machine: HeartBurnKid: Fart_Machine: HeartBurnKid: Obama has stepped up marijuana enforcement, if anything; medical dispensaries have been closed down at a greater rate than under Bush.

Personally I have no problem with making marijuana legal and putting the same restrictions on it that we have on tobacco. Having said that, here in California medical dispensaries have been their own worst enemies. Voters enacted Prop. 215 based on compassion for medical users. Medical dispensaries popped up like crazy and without proper regulation instead of cancer and glaucoma patients you had a bunch of eighteen year old kids with prescriptions for "back pain" which fed into the arguments of the opponents and got the Fed and local authorities cracking down on them.

Look, just make the shait legal already but until then police your own industry.

My mom uses medical marijuana to help her with the pain caused by her arthritis and her lupus. There's a ton of other stuff it's good for, too. If you think that cancer and glaucoma patients are the only ones that need it, you're the problem, not the dispensaries.

/facepalm.

Is that seriously what you got out of what I said? Really?


Yeah, it is. You want to throw anecdotes at me about "18 year old kids with back pain" getting phony MM cards (let me guess, they're the kids of all the welfare queens in Cadillacs, right?) and act like that means something? And, for that matter like that's something the dispensaries are responsible for in the first place? You want to talk about how the voters were snowjobbed with stuff about cancer and glaucoma like those are the only things pot is good for? You want to talk about how too many medical dispensaries popped up when there's a Walgreen's or a Rite-Aid on every street corner peddling Vicodin, Percocet, and Soma? And then you facepalm when I call you out on your ignorance? You're a very silly person, my friend. Silly, or sad; I don't know which yet.
 
2012-11-03 04:44:20 PM

rthanu: Blue_Blazer: Blue_Blazer: rthanu: Blue_Blazer: What about what I posted above from the L.A. Times? I know it's just some reporting claiming to repeat what Holder said, but if it's true, then what? Will you concede that the ones being busted are the ones breaking local laws and not just the ones that Mr. Sinister Obama decided to bust because he's a mean lying poopyhead?

Yes. I was posting what I posted while yours was posted. I concede that Obama is not as anti pot as his predecessors.

How about you tone down the Mr. Sinister Obama blah blah blah... Tell me where I came within a mile of saying anything about that. I'm voting for him, I like him, I agree with him more often than not.

I have to be honest. I feel more more aligned with the left than the right, but I don't agree with the left 100% of the time. Those rare times that I do disagree with the left and I vocalize it, I get shiat on by the rest of you like I'm just as bad as tenpoundsocheese. It's disheartening. Knock it off.

I appreciate your willingness to do exactly what you said and withdraw your argument, and I was just using "Mr. Sinister Obama" as pure hyperbole. But Mr. Sinister is one of my favorite Marvel villains and I would sincerely like to have a picture of Obama as him. Not kidding a bit.

And I was perhaps tough on you, but I've seen this same argument in this thread about ten times (not saying it was you every time) and so yeah I did want to see an actual response, which you willingly gave and I graciously accept.

It's not that you were extra mean or anything. It's just that if I disagree with Democratic policy X or things that the Fark left takes as gospel(Libertarianism = Somalia) that I'm automatically a rightist or "Fark Independent" or Libertarian or whatever else. It's not that I'm butthurt about it(maybe I am it's hard to be perfectly self reflective) I just get worn down by it a bit.


I honestly thought that by adding "poopyhead" to the end of my post it was fairly clear that I wasn't trying to call you a monster. I just don't like the whole "Obama is worse on pot" narrative when it is mainly the local authorities in Cali asking for federal help in places where zoning does not permit dispensaries. Also, refuting that argument takes the wind out of some of the GanJa advocates.
 
2012-11-03 04:53:28 PM

phaseolus: I often drive faster than the speed limit, especially on divided highways when conditions are good, but I don't get all red-faced and ragey because there's a sign on the side of the road with a number on it.


And how about when you get popped for a $100 fine plus costs plus surcharges plus court costs plus court surcharge cost fees plus a little something for the judge plus a surcharge on that...all for doing a perfectly safe 55 on a road engineered for 70 that's marked 45?

Speed limit laws are increasingly more about revenue than they are about safety.

I commute during overnight hours, and I'm constantly stopping at multiple red lights at shopping centers where every store has been closed for hours and not even taking deliveries for hours after I pass. 30 seconds idling here, 60 there, 15 at another one, 30 at the next one...four or five times on any given morning. That shiat adds up. I figure in any given year I burn through at least full tank of gas just sitting at empty intersections. I would kind of like that $70 or so to spend on my kids, y'know? I've biatched and moaned to the town and state officials along the route, and I've been able to get the DOT to move its ass and fix exactly ONE light.

So why such inertia? They know there's a problem, they know it doesn't make anybody safer and in fact makes things MORE dangerous because it bunches up the few cars that are on the road...and let me tell you that's a real joy when you're on a downhill stretch at 4am in a motherfarking ice storm and everybody has to jump on their brakes because the light at the farking empty strip mall with the Walgreens turned red...and yet they don't fix the problem. Instead they post cops at the empty strip malls to shake a couple hundred bucks out of anybody who sees one of these lights turn orange and hits the gas because they are sick of being caught at that farking light 200 times a year.

I'm not a capital-L Libertarian, but you know what? Power corrupts. The greater the power, the greater the corruption. And by corruption I don't mean simply penny-ante hundred-grand-in-the-freezer and no-show-patronage-job stuff. Corruption also means calculated inaction, as noted above. I mean also that It gets those with power believing their own press clippings and that every grandiose idea that comes into their heads (or is put there by a handler, more likely) is the most transcendently brilliant idea in the history of ever, and would become increasingly wonderful the more money was spent on it. And thus we get a military-industrial complex, a medical-industrial complex, a prison-industrial complex, an education-industrial complex and so forth. Power corrupts the officials you like, the ones I like, it corrupts Obama, Romney, and Gary Johnson too. At least Johnson realizes this and wants to give presidential power away before he does something with the power that's at best well-meaning but stupid. (At least that's what he says.)

Maybe that sounds like I have trust issues, but if you've lived in New York (my state) or Illinois or California or New Jersey or Texas or Florida or Louisiana or Massachusetts or (you get the idea) and don't have trust issues with politicians you haven't been paying attention. You know that lovefest the other day between Obama and Chris Christie? Most people got all misty about bipartisanship. I saw some smooth political calculations. Obama gets some GOP help in hanging on to his power Tuesday, Christie gets some Democratic help to help in hanging on to his power next yearwhen he's up for re-election, and Cory Booker gets to stay in Newark shoveling people's sidewalks and will learn to know his place if party leadership has anything to say about it.

Obviously we still need government to handle the big situations that nobody else can handle, but ideally the idea behind being a small-L libertarian is that that list of big situations and the list of big situations that require federal involvment (as opposed to strictly local or state action) is a lot shorter than either Republicans or Democrats say it is.
 
2012-11-03 04:54:50 PM

Dafatone: cman: Inb4 Libertarian bashers muck up this thread with their confusion of Libertarianism and Conservatism

I meant to say this in another thread. The reason why that confusion happens is because, at least in my experience, there are a whole slew of Libertarian sorts who, when push comes to shove, will side with their fiscal conservativism over their social liberalism.

People who say "yeah, I'd like to see drugs legalized / gays allowed to marry / religion out of politics, but I'm voting based on fiscal issues."


Which is weird because there isn't anything fiscally conservative about Libertarianism. How does running up debt infringe on people's liberty? It doesn't.
 
2012-11-03 04:55:54 PM
We need a Johnson in the White House after the last two dicks we've had in office. (Yeah, pun intended.)

Really? We need Johnson in the White House.
It seems the GOP got to Ron Paul as he has been too quiet lately (despite being blacked out). Paulites ought to really consider Johnson.
(And Paul should throw his support for Johnson to slap the GOP upside their head.)

/I want a third party.
 
2012-11-03 04:58:14 PM

thornhill: I love some of the arguments I'm hearing from Colorado about why folks are against legalizing pot.

My favorite is that Coloradians (is that what you call them?) don't want people coming to their state to buy weed and smoke. Or in other words, "please don't come to our state and spend your tourist dollars here."


The Dutch are struggling with that too.
 
2012-11-03 04:58:37 PM

Stoker:

/I want a third worldparty.


FTFY.

Yes, getting rid of public education, public roads, public everything, would lead to total collapse and extreme suffering.
 
2012-11-03 05:09:12 PM

HeartBurnKid: There's a ton of other stuff it's good for, too.


I am a bit skeptical when one of the more popular recreational drugs is claimed to be a cure for nearly everything (and yes, that is pretty much what hemp advocates claim). Patent medicines used to contain cocaine and opium; there was no denying that they made the patient feel better, no matter what their ostensible ailment was. I suspect the same is true of medical marijuana.
 
2012-11-03 05:15:38 PM

ilambiquated: thornhill: I love some of the arguments I'm hearing from Colorado about why folks are against legalizing pot.

My favorite is that Coloradians (is that what you call them?) don't want people coming to their state to buy weed and smoke. Or in other words, "please don't come to our state and spend your tourist dollars here."

The Dutch are struggling with that too.


I know the Dutch have been cracking down on things in Amsterdam a bit (technically, pot isn't actually legal in Amsterdam -- there's just a tradition of not enforcing the drug laws).

I've been to the Netherlands several times -- last time 2009 -- and I will say that some tourists -- mostly college students -- use the lack of drug enforcement as an excuse for public bad behavior. They basically treat the Red Light District like Bourbon St. in New Orleans. Or to put it another way, people seem to go out of their way to be a douche bag because pot is legal, and ruin it for everyone else.
 
2012-11-03 05:16:07 PM

pciszek: HeartBurnKid: There's a ton of other stuff it's good for, too.

I am a bit skeptical when one of the more popular recreational drugs is claimed to be a cure for nearly everything (and yes, that is pretty much what hemp advocates claim). Patent medicines used to contain cocaine and opium; there was no denying that they made the patient feel better, no matter what their ostensible ailment was. I suspect the same is true of medical marijuana.


Nothing wrong with smoking a little opium with your pot.

/maybe I misunderstood
//on purpose
///pot has lots of positive effects, study it out
 
2012-11-03 05:28:20 PM

HeartBurnKid: Yeah, it is. You want to throw anecdotes at me about "18 year old kids with back pain" getting phony MM cards (let me guess, they're the kids of all the welfare queens in Cadillacs, right?) and act like that means something? And, for that matter like that's something the dispensaries are responsible for in the first place? You want to talk about how the voters were snowjobbed with stuff about cancer and glaucoma like those are the only things pot is good for? You want to talk about how too many medical dispensaries popped up when there's a Walgreen's or a Rite-Aid on every street corner peddling Vicodin, Percocet, and Soma? And then you facepalm when I call you out on your ignorance? You're a very silly person, my friend. Silly, or sad; I don't know which yet.


No I'm face-palming because of your Wharrgarbl and lack of reading comprehension. I was using Cancer and Glaucoma as examples. I know Marijuana is wonderful for chronic pain since my late Father-in-Law, who didn't even drink, used it until he passed away. When he used prescription pain killers it made him more stoned that when he took carefully regulated doses of pot. I voted for Prop 215. I would have voted to legalize it for recreational use if given the chance (I guess you missed that part too). I never said anything about welfare queens or voters being snow-jobbed. I'm talking about a lack of regulations in the industry that makes it look bad like this shait. If you want to deny this plays into the hands of opponents that's fine, but you're displaying your own ignorance not mine.
 
2012-11-03 05:33:39 PM

pciszek: HeartBurnKid: There's a ton of other stuff it's good for, too.

I am a bit skeptical when one of the more popular recreational drugs is claimed to be a cure for nearly everything (and yes, that is pretty much what hemp advocates claim). Patent medicines used to contain cocaine and opium; there was no denying that they made the patient feel better, no matter what their ostensible ailment was. I suspect the same is true of medical marijuana.


I'm not saying it's a cure for everything. I'm saying it's great for symptomatic relief of anything that causes pain or nausea. And a hell of a lot better for you than the narcotics they usually give you for pain (seriously, my mom popped Vicodin like Pez before she got on marijuana).
 
2012-11-03 05:35:46 PM

Fart_Machine: HeartBurnKid: Yeah, it is. You want to throw anecdotes at me about "18 year old kids with back pain" getting phony MM cards (let me guess, they're the kids of all the welfare queens in Cadillacs, right?) and act like that means something? And, for that matter like that's something the dispensaries are responsible for in the first place? You want to talk about how the voters were snowjobbed with stuff about cancer and glaucoma like those are the only things pot is good for? You want to talk about how too many medical dispensaries popped up when there's a Walgreen's or a Rite-Aid on every street corner peddling Vicodin, Percocet, and Soma? And then you facepalm when I call you out on your ignorance? You're a very silly person, my friend. Silly, or sad; I don't know which yet.

No I'm face-palming because of your Wharrgarbl and lack of reading comprehension. I was using Cancer and Glaucoma as examples. I know Marijuana is wonderful for chronic pain since my late Father-in-Law, who didn't even drink, used it until he passed away. When he used prescription pain killers it made him more stoned that when he took carefully regulated doses of pot. I voted for Prop 215. I would have voted to legalize it for recreational use if given the chance (I guess you missed that part too). I never said anything about welfare queens or voters being snow-jobbed. I'm talking about a lack of regulations in the industry that makes it look bad like this shait. If you want to deny this plays into the hands of opponents that's fine, but you're displaying your own ignorance not mine.


So what you're saying is that, because Channel 4 found one fraudulent clinic, that means that medical marijuana as a whole is a sham and all the dispensary closings are completely justified and not at all the result of federal, state, and local authorities directly contradicting the will of the voters by closing up dispensaries (which, btw, do not have any connection with the clinics that NBC 4 was investigating in the first place).
 
2012-11-03 05:47:35 PM

HeartBurnKid: Fart_Machine: HeartBurnKid: Yeah, it is. You want to throw anecdotes at me about "18 year old kids with back pain" getting phony MM cards (let me guess, they're the kids of all the welfare queens in Cadillacs, right?) and act like that means something? And, for that matter like that's something the dispensaries are responsible for in the first place? You want to talk about how the voters were snowjobbed with stuff about cancer and glaucoma like those are the only things pot is good for? You want to talk about how too many medical dispensaries popped up when there's a Walgreen's or a Rite-Aid on every street corner peddling Vicodin, Percocet, and Soma? And then you facepalm when I call you out on your ignorance? You're a very silly person, my friend. Silly, or sad; I don't know which yet.

No I'm face-palming because of your Wharrgarbl and lack of reading comprehension. I was using Cancer and Glaucoma as examples. I know Marijuana is wonderful for chronic pain since my late Father-in-Law, who didn't even drink, used it until he passed away. When he used prescription pain killers it made him more stoned that when he took carefully regulated doses of pot. I voted for Prop 215. I would have voted to legalize it for recreational use if given the chance (I guess you missed that part too). I never said anything about welfare queens or voters being snow-jobbed. I'm talking about a lack of regulations in the industry that makes it look bad like this shait. If you want to deny this plays into the hands of opponents that's fine, but you're displaying your own ignorance not mine.

So what you're saying is that, because Channel 4 found one fraudulent clinic, that means that medical marijuana as a whole is a sham and all the dispensary closings are completely justified and not at all the result of federal, state, and local authorities directly contradicting the will of the voters by closing up dispensaries (which, btw, do not have any connection with the clinics that NB ...


Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. /rolleyes

This guy who is an advocate warns about the same issues. I give up. I'll leave you to your broad-brushing derp where anyone who points out any problems in the industry is a rabid anti-drug zealot who wants to close all clinics, blames welfare mothers, and believes medical marijuana is a sham even though I stated completely the opposite.
 
2012-11-03 05:47:55 PM

Kevin72: joonyer: Kevin72: joonyer: Oooh, Nader as a perjorative. You're SO edgy, subs!

Yes Nader is a pejorative. While 12 years later he is probably not the most hated man in America, it will not be forgotten that Nader gave the keys to the white house to the man who was vacationing in Crawford until the DAY BEFORE 9/11, lost the war on terror to clusterfark up Iraq, and put flushed our economy down the toilet after putting it in the toilet.

LMAO. Yes, all a guy's fault just for running for office. Brilliant.

Yes, it's a truly horrible thing to run for office, and for people to vote their conscience. Who would ever want people to do such a thing?

Keep rootin' for "your team". No matter how rigged the game is.

"Voting one's conscience" would make sense but for the fact that the Green Party's conscience is environmentalism, their raison de être. And the Democratic candidate, Al Gore, had done more to promote environmental issues in one month than Ralph Nadir did in a lifetime. So we get the most anti-environmental administration ever instead. But you know, both sides are bad, so vote Republican or Green, or Libertarian, just not Democratic.


Both sides are bad, so there needs to be more sides.
 
2012-11-03 05:52:10 PM

thornhill: ilambiquated: thornhill: I love some of the arguments I'm hearing from Colorado about why folks are against legalizing pot.

My favorite is that Coloradians (is that what you call them?) don't want people coming to their state to buy weed and smoke. Or in other words, "please don't come to our state and spend your tourist dollars here."

The Dutch are struggling with that too.

I know the Dutch have been cracking down on things in Amsterdam a bit (technically, pot isn't actually legal in Amsterdam -- there's just a tradition of not enforcing the drug laws).

I've been to the Netherlands several times -- last time 2009 -- and I will say that some tourists -- mostly college students -- use the lack of drug enforcement as an excuse for public bad behavior. They basically treat the Red Light District like Bourbon St. in New Orleans. Or to put it another way, people seem to go out of their way to be a douche bag because pot is legal, and ruin it for everyone else.


People in border towns like Venlo occasionally stage demonstrations against the flood of German dopers. However tolerance has improved production methods (the Dutch are great at gardening) and the methods have spread (via internet) across the border to Germany, so I think that traffic's dying down.
 
2012-11-03 08:34:12 PM

Amos Quito: [i1121.photobucket.com image 631x615]
"Third Party? Nonsense. You already have a choice."


It's almost cute that you think the answer to our 2 party system is someone who was a Republican last year and only became a Libertarian so he could keep running.

/maybe Romney can be come a Libertarian in 2016 and be a fresh new alternative to the status quo
 
2012-11-04 12:21:04 AM
Huh. I guess Obama shouldn't have laughed at all those people asking about legalizing marijuana.
 
2012-11-04 12:52:42 AM
Libertarians are conservatives too ashamed to call themselves Republicans. It's probably been said already, but I'm repeating it because it's true.
 
2012-11-04 03:09:34 AM

Fart_Machine: Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. /rolleyes

This guy who is an advocate warns about the same issues. I give up. I'll leave you to your broad-brushing derp where anyone who points out any problems in the industry is a rabid anti-drug zealot who wants to close all clinics, blames welfare mothers, and believes medical marijuana is a sham even though I stated completely the opposite.


Yes, yes, I get it. You're just concerned.
 
2012-11-04 04:25:16 AM

verbaltoxin: Libertarians are conservatives too ashamed to call themselves Republicans. It's probably been said already, but I'm repeating it because it's true.


Anybody should be ashamed to call themselves a member of either of the two major parties.
 
2012-11-04 08:01:46 AM

The AlbinoSaxon: Something tells me these are the same naive kids that expected Obama to fix everything in the first year and were pissed when he failed to meet their crazy expectations.


Uh, no. They're the Ron Paullies.
 
2012-11-04 08:56:09 AM

verbaltoxin: Libertarians are conservatives too ashamed to call themselves Republicans. It's probably been said already, but I'm repeating it because it's true.


I am small-l libertarian, and indeed am ashamed to be a registered Republican. You are right. And I am conservative in more ways than not. Although, I am liberal or ambivalent on social issues. What's your point?

You sound awfully proud of yourself for deducing this. I am going to go ahead and postulate that you are kind of a dick.
 
2012-11-04 02:14:42 PM

HeartBurnKid: Fart_Machine: Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. /rolleyes

This guy who is an advocate warns about the same issues. I give up. I'll leave you to your broad-brushing derp where anyone who points out any problems in the industry is a rabid anti-drug zealot who wants to close all clinics, blames welfare mothers, and believes medical marijuana is a sham even though I stated completely the opposite.

Yes, yes, I get it. You're just concerned.


Yes I get it. You're an idiot.

Ploink
 
2012-11-04 03:11:19 PM

rthanu: There are about 5 million other factors that seperates Somalia from a theoretical Libertarian America, and you would know this if you weren't as intellectually dishonest as the rightiest of the right. I'm not a big L or a little l or an Independent in any way, but the Somalia argument is R-E-T-A-R-D-E-D.


Tell that to the
 
2012-11-04 04:00:20 PM

Fart_Machine: HeartBurnKid: Fart_Machine: Yeah, that's exactly what I'm saying. /rolleyes

This guy who is an advocate warns about the same issues. I give up. I'll leave you to your broad-brushing derp where anyone who points out any problems in the industry is a rabid anti-drug zealot who wants to close all clinics, blames welfare mothers, and believes medical marijuana is a sham even though I stated completely the opposite.

Yes, yes, I get it. You're just concerned.

Yes I get it. You're an idiot.

Ploink


Right, you throw a pile of specious reasoning at me, link to sources that don't back up the point you're trying to make, and believe that somehow, not only do a few anecdotes point to a massive problem, but that this massive problem is somehow worse than people who actually have a medical need for a specific substance not getting it, and I'm the idiot. Sure.
 
Displayed 30 of 230 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report