Coffeehouse Thread

41 posts

Forum Read Only

This forum has been made read only by the site admins. No new threads or comments can be added.

What's your thought about no more legal medicinal marijuana stores?

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    dahat

    , cbae wrote

    *snip*

    I generally don't like to hear answers from people that use their own version of reality, so the answer to the first question is "no". As for the second question, when did you develop such a thin skin? I don't see you running to the defense of ComeOnBeer when he's called a "moron" after one of his classic diatribes.

    So you are going to stick to your talking points and name calling? Very well. Thanks for saving me a bit of typing.

    No more of a response from me is required when you are going to play such games.

     

  • User profile image
    cbae

    , dahat wrote

    *snip*

    So you are going to stick to your talking points and name calling? Very well. Thanks for saving me a bit of typing.

    *snip*

    No, problemo. For the record, my motives weren't entirely altruistic. Egoism and all that, you know?

  • User profile image
    magicalclick

    , cbae wrote

    @dahat: Obama rigid? Are you out of your freaking wingnut mind? He's been bending over backward to appease the Party of No. The progressives have been criticizing him for being far too accommodating to a party that would rather see the country go down the sh1tter than for him to get re-elected.

    I see. Thus, I guess Obama bended more than Bush did, because Bush didn't closed down "medicinal" drug stores. He is certainly super "flexible".

    Leaving WM on 5/2018 if no apps, no dedicated billboards where I drive, no Store name.
    Last modified
  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

    , dahat wrote

    And yet resorting to childish insults to try to make your point. Bravo!

    Exactly what did you find insulting?  You apoligized to me before insulting everything I wrote as 'nonsense'.  I told you it didn't bother me and not to worry about it.

    Did you fail to notice my use of the phrase "Bush didn't start it but he made it worse"? Why yes, yes you did.

    What you did was mock what I said as if I were blaming bush.  I was quite careful to avoid any form of blaming bush because, as I'll point out for the 4th f*cking time, Clinton did it before bush did.  Both of them were wrong.

    As I demonstrate time and time again in a rational and level headed way... yes, I do.

    You have done nothing of the sort.  You have, in fact, done the exact opposite through out this thread.

    Only for the time of that a given administration decides to not enforce the law as written... as seen in this case... they changed their mind.

    And, I think it has the potential to be for the better.

    Talk about some doublespeak!

    No, if he was smart he would have challenged the law immediately, not allow the creation of a dependency (the users) and aboveground economy (the jobs) through the explicit and intentional enforcement of the law... only to risk all of it after the fact.

    The dependency and abovegroud economy existed long before he took office.  It might have made a good movie moment for him to walk in and declare "weed is good, long live weed", but someone has already brought up his use of it in the past, so it would have been politically difficult.  Further, 2-3 years ago, he was busy dealing with more important things than encouraging the weed economy.

    He himself has now caused what you are/were afraid a Republican would do. Why not just cut out the middle stuff?

    I am not, nor have I ever been 'afraid' of what a republican would do.  I never said it, I never typed it, and gosh-darn it, if you'd calm the hell down, you might recognize that.

    Hell... an even smarter (and more politically savvy) would have been to allow the grey market to grow flourish (and likely become more politically powerful) so that when a future administration tried to re-enforce the laws, there would be an even larger push back against such a move.

    You know... what successive administrations have done with regards to illegal immigration?

    That is certainly an option.  I, personally, don't think that leaving the issue in a state of limbo is better than forcing it through the courts.  But see I'm progressive.  I like to see progress.  You're conservative.  You prefer to defer.

    You'll note my tag line off to the side there... "inanity makes my head hurt". It has nothing to do with *face palms*.

    Maybe, but to be honest, saying *face palm* is the kind of thing reserved for basement dwelling d*cks.  I'd like to assume you weren't one of them.

    #BasicLogicFAIL!

    Again... the precident was already there... then he changed it... then he changed it again.

    And I believe it will result in a legal case that will eventually make it to the supreme court.  I know that in some circles, the idea of changing your mind is viewed as weakness, however I'm not a member of that mindset.  That you believe otherwise again belies your conservative nature more than it does some form of actual strategy.

    Maybe some campaign bundling could make them safer... or even get them a nice DoE loan. I mean, they are green jobs, aren't they?

    Man, oh man.  You are a funny guy.

    Wait! When exactly did Obama direct the DOJ to challenge DADT (ie in court)? He's ordered them not to defend DOMA... but I can find no information as to the DOJ challenging DADT... hell, I can actually find the opposite.

    I would suggest supporting your claim before you dig yourself into any other factual holes.

    I don't have facts to back that up because I was worded it terribly and implied something that wasn't true.  What he did was not use an executive order even though he could have but instead push to have the matter settled by congress.  It is a similar attitude about changing the law that I am trying to draw a parallel to.

    You mean like the President just did!??!?!

    exactly.  You seem to be getting it.

    **projection snipped**

    You know nothing about me and what I do or don't want.  You seem to be far more caught up in how much you think I worship Obama than I am in actually liking the guy. 

    All I said, originally, was that I thought it was a good idea and I gave my reasons.

     

  • User profile image
    ScanIAm

     

    Wait! When exactly did Obama direct the DOJ to challenge DADT (ie in court)? He's ordered them not to defend DOMA... but I can find no information as to the DOJ challenging DADT... hell, I can actually find the opposite.

    I would suggest supporting your claim before you dig yourself into any other factual holes.

     

     

    Yeah, upon further investigation, I'll go ahead and dig that hole exactly like what I said originally.  This is much more similar to what happened with DADT.  The Obama DOJ continued to enforce DADT until the law could actually be changed in congress.

    Exactly what I think is going on here with medical mary jane.

     

     

Conversation locked

This conversation has been locked by the site admins. No new comments can be made.