Poor Colorado is not going to get its new taxes
Oh, poor government babies. They legalize pot, not because it is harmless and there is no logical reason for it to be illegal, but so they can get new taxes. It looks like they might not get them. My heart bleeds for them. *snif snif*
Previous comments... You are currently on page 4.
This is like the same idiots who claimed that exposing young children to sex "education" would reduce sexual activity among young people, because they'd no longer be curious.
We tried prohibition with alcohol, and it made it even worse. But, until recently, until the moderns launched their attacks on our society, pot was NEVER part of our culture.
I find it not ironic, but telling, how the decades long war on tobacco has played out, but NOT ONE person opposed to the criminalization of pot has even suggested, if we agreed to make it legal, to launch a similar war on pot. NOT ONE.
Tobacco use is down, because the ball-less wonders who hated their daddies for being men launched a campaign decades ago, starting with "well, we SHOULD have an area in restaurants for people with lung problems to eat"... to the point that now tobacco users are social pariahs, and even the use of e-cigs is being attacked.
The only smoker in the AS movies, btw, was Hugh Akston, and I don't recall him actually inhaling.
But will you moderns conduct such a war on pot? No. Why? Because the point wasn't to improve people's health, but to corrupt and change the culture.
There's a news clip out there from Iraq, I believe. A few years ago, because I actually got a letter to the editor published about it, I remember it. Some asshat was complaining about the use of tobacco in the movie, "Chicago", decrying how it might make the protagonists look "cool".
After reading it, I saw the clip... a handful of heroes engaged in a firefight, dragged a wounded one behind cover, and the officer offered him a cigar, which he lit up like a man. To me, rolling him a joint and passing it around just doesn't seem appropriate, or even manly, in that situation.
So I'm going to fight to restore my culture.
Watch my finger... I point at ALL OF YOU SCUMBAG 21ST CENTURY MODERNS...
You shake your head in wonder at the disconnect between environmentalists and the need for energy and technology, but you have an equal disconnect when it comes to a healthy, successful society and the toilet you've turned this one into.
Nice try at hiding behind your mother; I'm not supposed to attack potheads anymore because you claim she was one.
I have no idea how well your mother did or did not raise you, but I *do* know that had the progressives NOT perverted this country she wouldn't have been using pot.
No one brought up reefer madness, but I've met and seen plenty of potheads... pink-eyed, staggering around, NOT producing (worse, preventing others from producing), with the skunk-stench of pot emanating from them.
I no longer care what the pricetag is; what y'all have done to this society, you moderns, I find intolerable, and I will fight with everything I can to drag us back to the 1940s or earlier, culturally.
Oh, and it has been proven long ago that “Refer Madness” was a propaganda film with no real science backing.
This will not affect them at all. They will still get their money.
Good for Colorado
I think this situation provides another example of how when a state stands firm the federal government is usually the one to blink first and back off. My hope is that this will serve as an example to other states wanting to promote the ideals of personal liberty within their own state.
once the federal govt comes up with new policy on this -this will be a huge win for states rights. I mean the federal govt says illegal but if your state says legal they 'll make an allowance. Wow
Does this mean you have the long lost proof that people die from smoking pot?
If your justification for it being illegal is that it is "bad" for you do you also propose to make illegal my cigarettes because they can cause me cancer, my fatty foods because they could give me heart disease, my ice cream because it could give me diabetes, and my ammo reloading operations because they could raise the level of lead in my blood?
It seems inconsistent to me that you are so staunch on the size and function of the federal government, but also believe someone should be prevented from smoking pot BY FORCE OF LAW.
I have never been a pot smoker, but that is by choice, not because the government tells me no.
But, on the other hand, I'm always happy when government is denied a new revenue source.
Load more comments...