Spin that, obombem.

Am I suggesting that 0bama & Co. are colluding with criminal elements?

Yes, I am.

And Sotomayor is no flaming liberal either — she’s middle of the road, noncommital, safe for the wealthy pigs.

What makes you think the man who murders innocent children with drones without a second thought, with no remorse or conscience, who does whatever the “republicans” want him to do, including flushing our Social Security and Medicare down the toilet, who sneers in our faces with lies about why he won’t even consider legalization of MJ, who goes behind our backs to conspire with health insurance companies to rob us, who can’t give the wealthy parasites their tax breaks fast enough and approves the transfer of our money to the wealthy scumbags, no strings attached, for their “bailout” — what makes you think he’s going to go all out of character and appoint a “liberal” SC justice?

When I hear that sorry, fraudulent excuse for voting for the asshole, I have to question the sanity and sincerity of the person. Do your homework.

Back in the 70s, the National Safety Council conducted a study of driving under the influence of weed. They had three groups: Habitual pot smokers, first timers, and nonsmokers. The outcome would have gotten no coverage at all if not for a short article in Playboy magazine, so I have no link.

Turns out that the habitual smokers were the safest, because they were the most careful. Even the first-timers, who showed loss of reflex and other impairment were as safe as the straights, because they couldn’t be persuaded to go fast enough to get in any danger! So all we have these days is the unproved assertion that drivers under the influence of weed are dangerous – exclusively based on crashes involving drivers under the influence of other drugs plus weed.

So don’t trust any “science” on this subject unless you get into all of the facts of the so-called studies.

I am over sixty and have smoked when I could get it for more than 45 years. When I run out, I am just out. There is no withdrawal. And I smoke no more than I did at 20.

I am a helpless nicotine addict who has been trying vainly to quit for 20 years, so I know whereof I speak. Since I am old now and have no connections, I am also out of weed. High blood pressure runs in my paternal family line. I have always credited my lack of same with MJ. When I ran out last time, the only adverse effect was that now, suddenly, ten years later than other males in my family, I have high blood pressure.

Since I am unaware of any other male in my line that has reached 60, I wouldn’t want to bet heavily on my life expectancy at this point. Yes, I am taking medication to control it, but I would rather have the weed.

Biting off your fingernails can be habit forming. Indulgence in anything pleasurable can be too. But that isn’t addiction – and the fact that weed is more powerful these days simply means I need less of it to get high. Where are the “weed junkies” out stealing and robbing to get money to buy their drug? If they existed, they’d be the lead story on every newscast.

That being said, I would be willing to stake my life on a few points:

1) It’s LESS harmful than alcohol, in net, and probably less harmful (again, in net) than tobacco
2) Legalizing, regulating, and taxing it would be a useful source of revenue (although, honestly, I think most pot would be grown by home aficionados; how are you going to tax this trade?), and
3) The biggest harm, by far, from marijuana is the secondary harm as a result of the “war on drugs.” Simply ending this bogus “war” by legalizing marijuana would, overnight, free up millions or billions of dollars spent on enforcement, open up countless jail cells for REAL violent offenders, and free up many police officers to go after the truly dangerous folks, as opposed to potheads and cancer patients.

We need to drop the “pot never hurt anybody ever” thing when advocating about this, because it’s simply not true, according to the science. But in terms of magnitude of harm, it’s pretty small, and the harm caused by prohibition is almost unimaginable in scale. The moral choice is — or, at least, should be — clear.

c

As a former pot smoker and father I share concerns about the impact of marijuana on young brains. And as someone who started smoking when pot was far more benign, I also worry about how strong the stuff has become. That might be a reason to limit potency in a climate where pot was regulated, etc.–not saying that is not the answer. But I don’t think the WH response was insulting.