Here's How the Obama Admin. Is Considering Responding to Legal Pot in Colorado and Washington

Reason.com ^ | Dec. 6, 2012 10:26 pm | Mike Riggs

[count-your-change]

So you say but so far that’s been as good a reason as any not to waste my time.

[steve86]

The last two times I smoked it, 1978 and 1988, it made me sick and I threw up for hours.

I'm thinking that in 1972 or so I must have had fake pot because it was difficult to feel any effect at all, besides the hype of everyone around me.

Big Washington employers such as Boeing and, to a lesser extent, the Microsoft-Amazon-Starbucks types are hard at work formulating new time-not-at-work and second hand smoke policies. Wouldn't surprise me if some of the latter end up permitting smoking on the job during breaks. Seen stranger things happen on the liberal side of the state.

[elkfersupper]

So you say but so far that’s been as good a reason as any not to waste my time.

Okay, I understand.

You don't want to waste your time informing yourself of the facts.

Got it.

[Eric Blair 2084]

I was reading Richard Nixons autobiography last week. He was the same liberal POTUS who gave us OSHA, EPA.

His point was that a functioning gubmint of the people and for the people is impossible if the citizens are all drunk or stoned.

I’m not drunk or stoned, but Statist politicians make it tempting.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

Frankly I would like to deny all druggies taxpayer money, sterilize them and take away their children. Also punish them severly if they commit crimes while high on drugs and if they steal to get money for drugs.

Does all that include the addictive mind-altering legal drug alcohol?

If that happens I’ll be ok legalizing drugs.

Are you OK with the legality of the addictive mind-altering drug alcohol?

what's your point?

you read the terms under which I would legalize all drugs

My point is: do those terms also apply to your supporting the legality of the addictive mind-altering drug alcohol?

[RginTN]

Actually one can drink alcohol and not have ones mind altered. Three sips of alcohol doesn’t make one impaired but three puffs of pot can make one impaired.
Alcoholics are druggies and what I posted about druggies should apply to alcoholics.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

Actually one can drink alcohol and not have ones mind altered. Three sips of alcohol doesn’t make one impaired but three puffs of pot can make one impaired.

Depends on the pot - and for any pot, there is some amount that will leave you unimpaired. No difference there between pot and alcohol.

Alcoholics are druggies

Apples and oranges - not all those who use pot to the point of impairment are addicts. The apples-to-apples comparison is people who get alcohol-impaired and "druggies."

and what I posted about druggies should apply to alcoholics.

So you'll support the legality of alcohol only after people who get alcohol-impaired are denied taxpayer money, sterilized, and had their children taken away?

[RginTN]

What’s your point? Stop with the word games and just say it.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

No "word games," just this simple observation: Both alcohol and pot are drugs, both are often used to the point of impairment, and both sometimes lead to dependency (more often for alcohol, by the way).

And stemming from that simple observation, a simple question: Do you place the same conditions on the legalness of each drug?

[RginTN]

No "word games," just this simple observation: Both alcohol and pot are drugs, both are often used to the point of impairment, and both sometimes lead to dependency (more often for alcohol, by the way). And stemming from that simple observation, a simple question: Do you place the same conditions on the legalness of each drug? In previous posts I answered the question what I think should happen to druggies. Perhaps you should move on as I disagree with your opinion putting alcohol on the same level as marijuana.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

I disagree with your opinion putting alcohol on the same level as marijuana.

So which part(s) of my previous statement do you think are in error: "Both alcohol and pot are drugs, both are often used to the point of impairment, and both sometimes lead to dependency (more often for alcohol, by the way)."

[RginTN]

So which part(s) of my previous statement do you think are in error: "Both alcohol and pot are drugs, both are often used to the point of impairment, and both sometimes lead to dependency (more often for alcohol, by the way)."

I'm rather done with this conversation since I don't agree with your point.

[JustSayNoToNannies]

So which part(s) of my previous statement do you think are in error: "Both alcohol and pot are drugs, both are often used to the point of impairment, and both sometimes lead to dependency (more often for alcohol, by the way)."

I'm rather done with this conversation since I don't agree with your point.

And yet you won't give any reason why anyone should disagree with my point. I leave it to readers to decide why you won't do so.