Again, you know why. It does not infringe on their freedom of assembly, it would just change their tax status if they demonstrated. Admittedly, this is now a nation of lawyers, not men, tedious at best, soul wearying and, yes, freedom hating at worst, but the buck stops somewhere, usually in somebody's pocket(s). I deal with certain aspects of this overlawyered and overregulated society everyday. It does indeed suck royally, but grab a lawyer if you are going to effect change, some considerable amounts of the coinage kind which goes to your lawyer too. Justice, you might ask? Whilst her blindness was once considered a good thing, she is now an intellectual and developmentally disabled deaf and dumb paraplegic these days. Pray for a miracle. You may have one here, who knows?
I'll go with this idea of the culture of intimidation under the Obama administration, but, frankly, isn't that the culture of every single administration in our lifetime. I know your beloved Ronnie, you think, let us all free to be, but, did he, really?
Father Hesburgh, b. 1917, will be celebrating 70 years of the priesthood this month. In reviewing his bio at on Wiki I was reminded that he served as a member of the United States Civil Rights Commission from 1957, and Chairman from 1969, until his dismissal by President Richard Nixon in 1972 due to his frequent opposition to Nixon policies.
By the next election we should be through with any hope and change memes. but there is always a cadre of youngsters ready to board that bus. Too bad, so sad, that bullshit is what it is. Again...
Unless you did something he and Nancy did not like and he went so far as to promote chcking your urine for that. But that's your Dutch. Of course it is the ruination of American greatness, chug a lug for freedom!!!
This week’s Retro Report video on “crack babies” (infants born to addicted mothers) lays out how limited scientific studies in the 1980s led to predictions that a generation of children would be damaged for life. Those predictions turned out to be wrong.
A much more serious problem, it turns out, is infants who are born with fetal alcohol syndrome
Read more at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/20/booming/revisiting-the-crack-babies-epidemic-that-was-not.html?hp&_r=0
Maybe when we get the top 20 problems facing the US dealt with, we'll have the luxury of focusing on whether and how much drug laws should be loosened up.
Oh, guess you have been missing the WSJ's coverage of the marijuana legalization issue, e.g. http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-204146/ : "For the first time in four decades of polling on the issue, Pew Research found that a majority of Americans, albeit a slim one, supports legalizing marijuana."
There are laws on the books prohibiting those substances. Are those we hire to enforce our laws supposed to be selective in doing so?
I've always maintained that your beef is really with Congress and state legislatures. You have to convince the voting public that these substances are wonderful or at least harmless.
Again, you know why. It does not infringe on their freedom of assembly, it would just change their tax status if they demonstrated. Admittedly, this is now a nation of lawyers, not men, tedious at best, soul wearying and, yes, freedom hating at worst, but the buck stops somewhere, usually in somebody's pocket(s). I deal with certain aspects of this overlawyered and overregulated society everyday. It does indeed suck royally, but grab a lawyer if you are going to effect change, some considerable amounts of the coinage kind which goes to your lawyer too. Justice, you might ask? Whilst her blindness was once considered a good thing, she is now an intellectual and developmentally disabled deaf and dumb paraplegic these days. Pray for a miracle. You may have one here, who knows?
ReplyDeleteI'll go with this idea of the culture of intimidation under the Obama administration, but, frankly, isn't that the culture of every single administration in our lifetime. I know your beloved Ronnie, you think, let us all free to be, but, did he, really?
ReplyDeleteFather Hesburgh, b. 1917, will be celebrating 70 years of the priesthood this month. In reviewing his bio at on Wiki I was reminded that he served as a member of the United States Civil Rights Commission from 1957, and Chairman from 1969, until his dismissal by President Richard Nixon in 1972 due to his frequent opposition to Nixon policies.
ReplyDeleteBy the next election we should be through with any hope and change memes. but there is always a cadre of youngsters ready to board that bus. Too bad, so sad, that bullshit is what it is. Again...
Freedom was at the core of Dutch's worldview, governing philosophy and every policy decision.
ReplyDeleteUnless you did something he and Nancy did not like and he went so far as to promote chcking your urine for that. But that's your Dutch. Of course it is the ruination of American greatness, chug a lug for freedom!!!
ReplyDeleteThis week’s Retro Report video on “crack babies” (infants born to addicted mothers) lays out how limited scientific studies in the 1980s led to predictions that a generation of children would be damaged for life. Those predictions turned out to be wrong.
ReplyDeleteA much more serious problem, it turns out, is infants who are born with fetal alcohol syndrome
Read more at http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/20/booming/revisiting-the-crack-babies-epidemic-that-was-not.html?hp&_r=0
Maybe when we get the top 20 problems facing the US dealt with, we'll have the luxury of focusing on whether and how much drug laws should be loosened up.
ReplyDeleteOh, guess you have been missing the WSJ's coverage of the marijuana legalization issue, e.g. http://stream.wsj.com/story/latest-headlines/SS-2-63399/SS-2-204146/ : "For the first time in four decades of polling on the issue, Pew Research found that a majority of Americans, albeit a slim one, supports legalizing marijuana."
ReplyDeleteIf a newspaper can multi-task, why can't we?
Well, yay. Whatever. Yes, you see states like CO and WA going for legalization. It still doesn't rise to the level of a pressing national issue.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere are laws on the books prohibiting those substances. Are those we hire to enforce our laws supposed to be selective in doing so?
ReplyDeleteI've always maintained that your beef is really with Congress and state legislatures. You have to convince the voting public that these substances are wonderful or at least harmless.
Just sayin' that WSJ frequently covers the issue, google it if you do not believe me.
ReplyDelete