Posts Made By: James Brown

Rod Kaufman said:

I can understand the medicinal use of pot in selected and limited cases but the recreational use of it, like other drugs, is crossing the line IMO.
I wouldn't want a pot-high driver next to me on the highway and Colorado's law permits its use in vehicles. I think that's a major mistake. The line up of people waiting to get high on this stuff is ludicrous. I hope this isn't a precedent for other states...

Rod, Richard:

I'm 99% sure that Colorado law does not allow pot use in moving vehicles. There is an "open container" provision in the law, same as for alcohol.

I generally agree with both of you.

For better or worse, I voted for the Colorado medical marijuana bill several years ago because I naively believed that those suffering from chemotherapy or glaucoma ought to be able to smoke pot legally, since it seems to provide welcome relief. I still believe this of course, but this is clearly not what the people pushing the medical marijuana amendment were after. Foolish me, foolish us.

Within a couple of years after passage of medical pot, Denver and Boulder were overrun with so-called "medical" pot dispensaries with cute names like "Freakys"

http://www.freakys.com/freakys7.html

Even before recreational pot became legal, there was a section of Denver known colloquially as "Little Amsterdam." On-site pseudo-doctors write pot prescriptions for anyone with an ailment. Before recreational pot was legalized, there did not even seem to be the slightest pretense that the medical dispensaries were doing anything except selling recreational pot. (I never really understood why legitimate medical pot wasn't dispensed through our existing pharmacies – I guess CVS doesn't want to trip over federal laws…)

When our Amendment 64 came along legalizing recreational pot, I voted against it in a self-recognized futile gesture – but it passed fairly easily. In view of the fact that our existing "medical dispensaries" are selling recreational pot anyway, I am sort of glad the recreational amendment passed, because the State is taxing the snot out of recreational pot (25%) and I don’t believe that “medications” are taxed at all.

I am not generally a slippery slope guy. As a matter of fact on other issues (gun control, late term abortion etc.) I think that the slippery slope arguments are pure hogwash. In this particular case however, based upon my own observations, I would say that legalizing medical pot (and more particularly medical pot dispensaries with on-site "physicians" writing pot prescriptions) effectively leads to legalized recreational pot.

I've never been a user – even in college. If pot is going to be legal though, it ought to be taxed heavily and stoned drivers should be prosecuted. Colorado just passed a “legal limit” for THC after failing to do this in several other legislative sessions. The stoner lobby went nuts because THC is (perhaps correctly, I don’t know) argued to be metabolized differently, such that some serious users over the legal limit might not be impaired. So it goes. The Colorado Department of Transportation has statistics showing a steady rise in auto fatalities where the driver had THC in his system over the past several years. That could be a result of more testing, or it could be an ominous trend.


Jim

billy moss said:

My right as a Christian is to tell people what the Bible says. God completely destroyed two cities because of this un natural sin. If the Supreme court is not going to help run this country in the way that God wants us to, and add to the immorality, then they need to do away with the Bible as a swearing in tool. If enough Christians would express their feelings about this disgusting sin, maybe the supreme court would think. They are letting a small minority do what the majority of the people are against. Some one has to stand up. I had much rather make the Supreme Court and the gays mad, than to make God mad. Biblical correctness is a lot more important than political correctness. If you think I am wrong for expressing my opinion, you will just have to think it. That is what is wrong with this country now, Christians have stood by and let immorality take over. One woman took the Bible out of school, while millions of Christians did nothing, If we had of took a stand then, maybe our school systems would not be in the shape they are in now. Jesus gave his life, his body torn and ripped to shreds, so I can keep from having to go through that. The least I can do is do my best to get the word to the places they need to be.

Billy:

You are missing the critical point. All of our laws regarding gay marriage and all of the court cases requiring gay marriage concern civil marriage granted under the laws of a state. The Equal Protection Clause, in my view and in the view of most courts, prohibits discrimination in the civil marriage laws based upon orientation. Obviously, each state can also pass laws directly sanctioning civil marriage between gays as the voters of those states see fit. Your own narrow and suspect theological viewpoint should not be considered by the Courts or the Legislatures. It is a shame that Maurice (an Aussie) has to explain these simple concepts to you.

On the other hand, the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses assure that nothing the Supreme Court does and no state statute can force your church to grant gays sacramental marriage. I'm assuming that wholehearted endorsement of discrimination against gays is how your church interprets scripture, and I am very saddened to say that this is how my church interprets scripture, for now at least. Until that ancient prejudice is rectified, churches are free to discriminate in the dispensation of sacramental marriage as they see fit.

Jim

Rod Kaufman said:

"the moronic hobby lobby decision"

Hi Rod:

Hobby Lobby might come back to bite Rs in the butt, given the hyperbole and outright lies being spread by the left in view of this decision. (The primary lie that one reads everywhere on lefty sites being that corporations can now "deny" women birth control... Sigh.)

In any case, I am taking your use of the word "moronic" above to be your own personal commentary. I can't believe that you have actually read the Hobby Lobby opinion or any scholarly commentary if you actually think the decision is "moronic." Here is a good place to start: http://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/sebelius-v-hobby-lobby-stores-inc/

The Hobby Lobby decision can easily be described as being routine, very limited in scope, relatively unimportant and entirely mandated by the RFRA, a federal law signed by Bill Clinton. No one but a pure partisan who has no interest whatsoever in the actual decision would call it "moronic."

Here's an issue most of could rally behind though: Obamacare does not mandate that our health insurance pay for free condoms. Do you feel discriminated against yet?

J

Charles R Genovese, Jr MD said:

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2014/07/15/thor-is-now-woman/

Nice armor though, just sayin.

J

Rod Kaufman said:

http://money.cnn.com/2014/07/30/investing/gdp-report/index.html?hpt=hp_t2
CONS on the forum, wrong again...

Hi Rod:

This is kind of like saying that global warming is false because it is cold and rainy in Denver today (it is really cold and rainy by the way). In other words, preliminary numbers on one economic quarter don't prove anything. Personally, I think that the economy is doing OK and recovering slowly, but I also think there is a lot of truth in this companion CNN article, linked to in your original piece:

http://money.cnn.com/infographic/economy/why-you-dont-feel-recovered/?iid=EL

One underlying theme of the above piece is that this recovery is only creating wealth and opportunity for the already well-to-do. That is great for me and most astromarters...sort of. Our 401ks and portfolios are doing great. But, just this morning the WSJ had an article about the real beneficiaries of current policy:

http://online.wsj.com/articles/ruchir-sharma-liberals-the-one-percent-1406676743

I'm thrilled with my investment results, but I wonder if lots of Jim M's meat and produce customers, (whom I imagine to be suburban consumers of all economic classes many of whom can not afford top-shelf optics) share the feeling that the economy is doing all that well? Especially his poorer customers?

In any case it is weird that liberal economic policy has turbocharged income inequality and enhanced the disparity between the haves and the have-nots. I don't mind the robust stock market one bit, but this situation confirms one of my primary reasons for not voting D.

D policies don't actually help the poor or downtrodden in meaningful ways.

Sorry for rambling...

Jim

Patrick Keafer said:

...when your own media allies turn against you.

Liberal Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank has finally recognized what we conservatives have been saying for this entire term. Obama has checked out.

Obama vacations as the world burns

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-obama-vacations-as-the-world-burns/2014/08/11/58755e5e-21a5-11e4-86ca-6f03cbd15c1a_story.html

"Hillary Rodham Clinton, his once-loyal secretary of state and his likeliest successor, has gone rogue, criticizing his foreign policy as too timid.
Obama responded with not one but two rounds of golf..."

"...Obama stood on the South Lawn on Saturday updating Americans on the new bombing campaign in Iraq — and then he boarded Marine One for a two-week trip to Martha’s Vineyard. There, half an hour after arriving at his vacation home, he was already on his way to a golf course. He played again Sunday, then had a beach outing Monday followed by a political fundraiser."

"...By Monday afternoon, the crises had forced Obama to revise his schedule. The White House announced that the president, after returning from the beach, would make an unscheduled statement about Iraq...Obama finished his four-minute statement and then hopped in his motorcade for the ride to a Democratic fundraiser."

Hi Patrick:

That's huge coming from Dana Milbank.

In a similar piece, Maureen Dowd skewered Hillary in her NYT column today, which is not surprising, that is Dowd's style. Still, the reader's comments that were marked as "NYT editor's picks" were decidedly anti-HRC. I wonder how far this will go? Far enough to push Hillary out of the race? I doubt it, but you never know.

Jim

Seriously Rod?

Did you notice that your source here is an uncredentialed, anonymous and nearly illiterate internet hack named "Rmuse"? I could barely read his/her wretched prose and I have no idea what his/her point was. That's 3 minutes of my life I'll never get back.

Jim

Wow Floyd. These are really great! Are you still shooting with your TEC 140?

Jim

Another one

Very nice!

Jim