I don't see quotation marks, do you?
Sessions: I'm Shutting Down Colorado
- Thread starter schuylaar
- Start date
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
awwww, look at you. all jealous and whatnot.
well, you're a grown damn man, pushing 40 years old, and only making $12 an hour at your construction job.
so yeah, you have good reason to be all bitter.
UncleBuck
Well-Known Member
remember when we had actual neo-nazis on the forum, and you were going around calling me racist while saying that they might be "possibly bigoted"?
this post of yours i just quoted will age just as poorly.
you can suck trump's dick all you want, but he still wants to kick down your front door, lock you up in prison, and have you forfeit any and all assets, no matter how lowly they may be, to the altar of the state.
you voted for him because you hate minorities and "illegals", but you forgot that pot smokers are "illegals" too.
you dumb racist.
PCXV
Well-Known Member
What bias and fallacy? Any reason why you won't be more specific?
CannaBruh
Well-Known Member
Read the article, I was very specific in one of my earlier responses, in fact you quoted me prior with specifics within that quote.
Do you think the article reads as a non-bias document of science, or something written to stir the base? It's hardly objective, cannabis cup is happening right now... Sessions isn't shutting anything down, not sure what more to read into that ~4month old article.
Missed the part in the article where they cite Trump as saying medical should happen, or some of the other appointing implications in other head spots in the admin, I'll let you dig up who those might be and how that might be a good sign for the movement.
Do you think the article reads as a non-bias document of science, or something written to stir the base? It's hardly objective, cannabis cup is happening right now... Sessions isn't shutting anything down, not sure what more to read into that ~4month old article.
Missed the part in the article where they cite Trump as saying medical should happen, or some of the other appointing implications in other head spots in the admin, I'll let you dig up who those might be and how that might be a good sign for the movement.
Big_Lou
Well-Known Member
"When"? Shit, I can call out at least a half dozen that post on the regular.....
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
You do know that the vast majority of older people in America never attain this level of financial independence, right?
And how are you supposed to save anything at all if you work a minimum wage job? You can't afford rent and food, let alone savings!
The wealthy in this country earn $500k+ per year and have a net worth of many times that. The ultra rich- .01%, or 1 in 10,000, earn nearly $30 million annually, yet these groups pay LESS tax than people making $50k/yr!
The top 10% now make over half of all the income earned and own well over 90% of all the wealth. That doesn't leave much for middle class folks (what's left of them) to retire on.
The American Dream has been crushed under the weight of corporate subsidies, giveaways, tax breaks and wage cuts- all of which are taken from the rest of us.
That's why the vast majority of older people in America are destitute.
It doesn't need to be this way. The rest of the developed world doesn't work like this and America shouldn't either.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
That's 'shrivelry'...
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Now for the hard part; how to go about fixing all this? I think we go after Citizens United first, by any means necessary.
PCXV
Well-Known Member
Can you take on any specific argument in the article? You keep repeating that it's biased, you keep trying to discredit the headline, but you haven't talked about any of the substance of the article. Maybe you haven't read it?
The summary argument is "what's to stop them from enforcing the ideals they publicly hold and the statements they publically made against marijuana when campaigning?" The author points out that they have nothing to lose politically and might turn to marijuana once they fail to realize their other campaign promises.
Trump has made a statement for medical marijauna, he also guarenteed EVERYONE healthcare aka universal healthcare. Trump says a lot of things, Sessions is staunchly anti-marijuana.
PCXV
Well-Known Member
If you are talking about this post I quoted, it's just a long-winded way of saying "he is hyperbolizing". I'm asking how is it hyperbole beyond the obvious bias or how likely are the actual scenarios he describes.
PCXV
Well-Known Member
To me, the point being made is that IF Sessions decides to go after marijuana, there isn't much in the way to stop him. I don't see any real exaggeration in the basic argument and facts:
1. Blue states have legal recreational marijuana laws. Republicans are consituents of red states that fear marijuana being trafficked from legal states. Verifiably True.
2. Trump et al have interests in industries that compete with marijuana and benefit from it's criminalization (prison, pharma, oil, etc.) Verifiably True.
3. The rec MJ industry is still small compared to the goliaths of other industries. Verifiably True.
4. This admin is unpredictable and doesn't abide by conventional political wisdom. Actions speak louder than words; Obama said he wouldn't go after marijuana but had more raids in his 1st term than Bush did in 2 terms. Verifiably True.
5. It wouldn't take much effort for Sessions to affect the industry, including confidence in the industry. Somewhat speculation, but the examples he gives would truly hurt the industry.
6. Mexico paying for the wall, banning Muslim refugees and sending them home, ending ISIS in 30 days, repeal and replace the ACA, fixing our infrastructure, bringing back coal jobs, paying down the debt after a huge tax revenue cut aka tax cut --> all promises that will likely not happen. Marijauna might be there "win" they need just to tell their consituents "see we did something!". Marijuana was already the scapegoat of failed alcohol prohibition, Sessions has said that Marijuana is almost as bad as heroin. Somewhat speculation but not unfathomable.
What do you think is exaggerated?
Last edited:
CannaBruh
Well-Known Member
I think you present a very credible and valid list of points, which the article failed to do..
..however nobody has spotted Sessions at the cup, Subcool will get his lifetime award, and someone will win some trophys. Nothing has signaled a sky is falling, as some are suggesting the article lays out as imminent.
..however nobody has spotted Sessions at the cup, Subcool will get his lifetime award, and someone will win some trophys. Nothing has signaled a sky is falling, as some are suggesting the article lays out as imminent.
PCXV
Well-Known Member
Well, I changed his argument to a new headline. The arguments don't convince me Sessions will undoubtedly go after rec MJ, but I think it does give an insight into why he might and how effective he could be.
Justin-case
Well-Known Member
I'll bet he goes after political donrs first.
Since 1980 to present, the GDP has continued to rise and Americans have benefitted from that all along- the top 10% has received 100% of it while the bottom 90% has received 0%
It was formulated to be this way.
What are the fallacies? I'd like to discuss.
Don't shoot the messenger?
Happy thought and platitudes aren't going to keep the fight going.