Reuters: First U.S. marijuana cafe opens in Portland

[boofMcboof]

Marijuana is a gateway . . . a gateway to good times.

[Vicious]

So wait, why is it illegal to sell marijuana to healthy persons for recreational use, but morally acceptable to give it to medical patients with their weakened immune systems, given all of the alleged harm that marijuana does to the body?

Because all the damage it does was a lie.

[Vicious]

Having a bad family life is the real gateway drug.

[twa]

Because all the damage it does was a lie.

Like tobacco?

[ixcuincle]

Marijuana is NOT a gateway drug. That's just propaganda set up by the man. Nearly every pothead I know sticks to pot. So how can it be a gateway drug?

[skinfan133]

But in this case big government is ok. Because they're putting people in jail for smoking evil mari-ju-ana. Drugs are bad, mkay.

**** that, as a true small gov't conservative, this is definitely a step in the right direction: leave this issue up to the states, most of which clearly favor legalization. It ain't the fed's business.

I might add I've never smoked marijuana and I never will

[RIPSean]

Marijuana is NOT a gateway drug. That's just propaganda set up by the man. Nearly every pothead I know sticks to pot. So how can it be a gateway drug?

Yeah the argument that it is a gateway drug is often supported by statistics showing that most hard drug users have used or use marijuana. This is true. But it does not mean there is any connection between the 2.

Most crackheads have probably smoked a joint. So what? I bet they've also had a beer and smoked a cigarette. There is nothing scientific about these claims.

[mjah]

MJAH - You're quick to place the blame on pharmacists for not "doing their job" because of personal beliefs. Yet I hear nothing from you about the head of our government openly announcing they aren't going to do their "job" because it's something they don't feel is necessary.

Well, I was posting the pharmacist comment as a joke. I even used a winky face to clue in the slightly-too-serious. But since you asked, it's wrong for any President to openly refuse to enforce a Federal law. Similarly, it's also wrong for any pharmacist to refuse to do his or her job.

But I recall hearing nothing from you about the previous head of our government going yet one step further, using signing statements to say "I'm personally signing this into law yet I have no intention of recognizing or enforcing any of the parts I disagree with." He challenged or disregarded well over 1,000 sections of bills that he himself signed.

And not to single him out -- he wasn't the only one. Just the most egregious. Presidents since the 1800s have made occasional use of signing statements too.

Naturally, keeastman, you were apoplectic over this and have posted many times in the past about the mockery it makes of the Constitution -- right?

I assume you wouldn't criticize me for being silent if you did exactly the same thing.

I'm genuinely curious and it's entirely possible that I missed your earlier posts on the subject, so I have to ask: How many times in the past have you called out and criticized signing statement abuse or selective enforcement (by anyone, not just W/Obama) in the way you're accusing me of not doing?

Given your reaction to my post, I assume it must be dozens... and I'd be interested in reading them.

[Special K]

But I recall hearing nothing from you about the previous head of our government going yet one step further, using signing statements to say "I'm personally signing this into law yet I have no intention of recognizing or enforcing any of the parts I disagree with." He challenged or disregarded well over 1,000 sections of bills that he himself signed.

Naturally, keeastman, you were apoplectic over this and have posted many times in the past about the mockery it makes of the Constitution -- right?

I assume you wouldn't criticize me for being silent if you did exactly the same thing.

I'm genuinely curious and it's entirely possible that I missed your earlier posts on the subject, so I have to ask: How many times in the past have you called out and criticized signing statement abuse or selective enforcement (by anyone, not just W/Obama) in the way you're accusing me of not doing?

Given your reaction to my post, I assume it must be dozens... and I'd be interested in reading them.

Whelp, have fun searching. You want the information, you get to search.

I can tell you this, I've been on here for approx. 2 years as compared to your well over 5 years. Don't know how many threads regarding signature orders during the Bush administration there have been during my membership here, you probably have a better grasp on that than I do. I remember lots of other stupid ass partisanship threads though...particularly ones started by some of our favorite members around here. Some of those threads I've been involved in...much to my own dismay.

I probably missed a few constitutional threads, I've missed posting in a lot of threads actually...due to things like life. Sorry if I haven't "adequately" expressed my outrage yet. If you want to know my pattern though, I usually prioritize my responses to stuff I'm more familiar with, like pharmaceutical threads or other threads that involve or are on the fringe of health care related issues.

The reason I responded to you post, was just that, b/c you posted in a thread. Next time you see me in a thread not pointing out various sides of a debate as it relates to the constitution, feel free to respond to one of my posts.

But for the purposes of your request, you can consider this me going on the record now. And when another constitutional thread comes around that you think I need to be involved in, feel free to PM me to get my butt in there to express my disdain.

[mjah]

Whelp, have fun searching. You want the information, you get to search.

Translation: you've never mentioned the issue before.

Search is busted at the moment (blank screen) despite several attempts, so I'll take your word for it -- for now.

Honestly, I expected you to point to a dozen big ol' posts about signing statements etc., and to be incredulous over me not noticing any of them for years. Instead, it seems that the issue of selective enforcement just hasn't been important enough for you to comment on it.

I'm not criticizing that at all. It's just that your question now isn't all that important to me. No offense intended.

Back to my original (tongue in cheek) point: I bet bud-tenders do their jobs 100% of the time.

[G.A.C.O.L.B.]

THC is actually highly addictive....

Link?

Anyway, you want to know how stupid our drug laws are in this country? Especially when it comes to marijuana? The AMA just asked the federal government to remove the Schedule 1 status from marijuana (they subsequently declined to do so.) Schedule 1 status basically means that it is a dangerous drug with no accepted medical use. This means that groups aren't technically allowed to do research on marijuana in the US, you're not technically allowed to carry it in pharmacies, it can't technically be prescribed by doctors, etc under federal law. Other Schedule 1 drugs are heroin and LSD.

There are 5 different schedule classifications that go from harshest down. Schedule 2 drugs are drugs that have a high risk of abuse but also have some medical use. Thus making them available for prescription and to be carried in pharmacies. Examples? Cocaine and morphine.

http://www.justice.gov/dea/pubs/csa/812.htm

So the federal government has a harsher classification of freaking marijuana than it does of cocaine and morphine. Yup. Makes sense.

Sorry if you all already know this. I just never really realized it (the specifics) before until I read that story about the AMA.

[Seabee1973]

But I recall hearing nothing from you about the previous head of our government going yet one step further, using signing statements to say "I'm personally signing this into law yet I have no intention of recognizing or enforcing any of the parts I disagree with." He challenged or disregarded well over 1,000 sections of bills that he himself signed.

And not to single him out -- he wasn't the only one. Just the most egregious. Presidents since the 1800s have made occasional use of signing statements too.

Naturally, keeastman, you were apoplectic over this and have posted many times in the past about the mockery it makes of the Constitution -- right?

I assume you wouldn't criticize me for being silent if you did exactly the same thing.

I'm genuinely curious and it's entirely possible that I missed your earlier posts on the subject, so I have to ask: How many times in the past have you called out and criticized signing statement abuse or selective enforcement (by anyone, not just W/Obama) in the way you're accusing me of not doing?

Given your reaction to my post, I assume it must be dozens... and I'd be interested in reading them.

The president with the most signing statements was actually Bill Clinton. Bush 43 used signing statements the same way as his dad and Reagan. Just a lot more Signing staemenst are used toprevent unconstitutional bills from become law avoiding an over ride of a presidenmtial veto

[Capt Rich Fla]

Come on now, most pot heads are fun to laugh at. They think they are normal and that weed has no affect on them, but looking at you from my side, shut the **** up.:hysterical:

[Vicious]

Like tobacco?

Tabacco causes cancer. Vaporized marijuana and Marinol tablets fight cancer.

[Vicious]

Come on now, most pot heads are fun to laugh at. They think they are normal and that weed has no affect on them, but looking at you from my side, shut the **** up.:hysterical:

Much more normal compared to an alcoholic..

[Capt Rich Fla]

Coke heads make alot more sense in a conversation than a pot head. When do we make that legal. Not many pot heads have won Wimbleton, or crushed homerun records, or gone to probowls. What if we made every NFL player take HOOT for a couple of games? That would be like watching the 300 spartans turn on each other.

[Vicious]

Coke heads make alot more sense in a conversation than a pot head. When do we make that legal. Not many pot heads have won Wimbleton, or crushed homerun records, or gone to probowls. What if we made every NFL player take HOOT for a couple of games? That would be like watching the 300 spartans turn on each other.

Are you insane? I can understand is you're talking about Astrophysics (although I have anecdotal evidence to the contrary).. but as for Pot heads not making the pro bowl, that's occurred on our own team!! I'd leave sports out of it. lol

I would take it in another direction. It's not that you won't achieve some fantastic feat if you smoke marijuana. It's just not something you should do if you're trying to raise a family and work. I don't think anything like alcohol, marijuana, drugs and their kin are vices a person should have if they want to be serious about their home life. I don't know how I would have turned out if my parents smoked dope all day.

[Capt Rich Fla]

Are you insane? I can understand is you're talking about Astrophysics (although I have anecdotal evidence to the contrary).. but as for Pot heads not making the pro bowl, that's occurred on our own team!! I'd leave sports out of it. lol

I would take it in another direction. It's not that you won't achieve some fantastic feat if you smoke marijuana. It's just not something you should do if you're trying to raise a family and work. I don't think anything like alcohol, marijuana, drugs and their kin are vices a person should have if they want to be serious about their home life. I don't know how I would have turned out if my parents smoked dope all day.

Uh, maybe I didn't do such a good job expressing my sarcasm. I don't do or approve of drugs in any way. I'm not going to say it never happened to me, but I finally grew up when I saw my first child. I'm dead set against MJ as a legal drug. Although I am in realisation that it does have benefits that are starting to out number the negatives, so the whole talk has me scratching my head. I do know that MJ is NOOOOO good for me.

[Hubbs]

Uh, maybe I didn't do such a good job expressing my sarcasm. I don't do or approve of drugs in any way. I'm not going to say it never happened to me, but I finally grew up when I saw my first child. I'm dead set against MJ as a legal drug. Although I am in realisation that it does have benefits that are starting to out number the negatives, so the whole talk has me scratching my head. I do know that MJ is NOOOOO good for me.

And MJ is no good for me, either. (Seriously, it seems to interfere with my prescription for Adderall, I have no interest in the stuff). Therefore, I should support the arrest of anyone else that uses it.

[RIPSean]

Coke heads make alot more sense in a conversation than a pot head. When do we make that legal. Not many pot heads have won Wimbleton, or crushed homerun records, or gone to probowls. What if we made every NFL player take HOOT for a couple of games? That would be like watching the 300 spartans turn on each other.

First off, judging by your grammar and your irrational post, I'd say you probably don't make much sense in a conversation either.

Not many "pot heads" have made Pro Bowls, and they're no good at sports, huh?

KNOWN pot smokers in the NFL:

-Ricky Williams. The poster boy of stoner athletes. Former Pro Bowler and Heisman trophy winner. Still productive in the final seasons of a long career.

-Record holding Randy Moss. 6 time pro bowler.

-Super Bowl MVP Santonio Holmes.

-Nate Newton- Six time Pro Bowl guard, busted with over 213 pounds of pot in 2001.

-Muhsin Muhammad- 2 pro bowls.

-Mark Stepnoski- 5 time Pro Bowl center. Outspoken advocate and NORML speaker.

-Calvin Johnson- One of the top young receivers in football. 1 time Pro Bowl alternate.

-Michael Vick- 3 Pro Bowls.

-Travis Henry- 2002 Pro Bowler.

-Percy Harvin- a rookie of the year candidate.

This is just a short list of a few guys I found when googling the subject and a few off the top of my head. And those are just known users. For every known user, their could be dozens of unknown users. Shoot, Portis and Moss could be blazing it up right now.

So is there significant marijuana use in other sports? Yep.

-Charles Oakley estimated that at least 60% of NBA players smoke pot daily.

-Michael Phelps, one of the greatest athletes of all time. I don't need to say anymore on that one.

-Usain Bolt, one of the greatest sprinters of all time, has admitted to past marijuana use.

-Tennis star Jennifer Capriati won 2 Wimbledon's and was once busted for pot.

-Tim Lincecum, one of the best pitchers in baseball, was recently busted with pot.

These are just a few examples. There's many more out there.

[ChocolateCitySkin]

Coke heads make alot more sense in a conversation than a pot head. When do we make that legal. Not many pot heads have won Wimbleton, or crushed homerun records, or gone to probowls. What if we made every NFL player take HOOT for a couple of games? That would be like watching the 300 spartans turn on each other.

you mean like randy moss?

dude, you do realize a big chunk of nba players play high out of their gourds.

[mjah]

The president with the most signing statements was actually Bill Clinton.

I never claimed otherwise. But as you may know, a lot of signing statements basically consist of "Yay, I'm passing this bill and it's really important!" So the number of statements isn't nearly as important as the number of challenges a President issues to the bills he is signing. (Signing!) The objection count is the controversial aspect of signing statements -- not the statement count.

Of Clinton's signing statements, only 18% of them contained any kind of objection to a legal/constitutional aspect of a bill. Contrast that with Bush Jr., whose rate was about 80%!

And Bush Jr. objected to roughly 1,200 bill lines in 8 years. That's twice the number of objections of all previous Presidents combined.

Combined!

At some point you need to stop signing bad bills and force Congress to either do their damned jobs or go the F home.

And that's why Bush Jr.'s use of signing statements was controversial while Clinton's was much, much less so.

[twa]

Do you happen to know how many O has issued?

[Capt Rich Fla]

you mean like randy moss?

dude, you do realize a big chunk of nba players play high out of their gourds.

Really? How do you know that. If drugs are illegal and I assume they get tested. What are they doing high? Better question yet, why are they not caught. Still better question, why don't they get into trouble?

[Capt Rich Fla]

RIPSean, do you really want to argue your position with Vick, Calvin Johnson and Travis Henry? :hysterical: