Comments on: James Roberts mans the barricades

By: Hope

Hope — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 20:40:39 +0000

Roberts sounds a bit self righteous and more than a little bit strange, to me.

0 0

By: Douglas Willinger

Douglas Willinger — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 18:13:09 +0000

And look at how he ignores that MJ is way safer then Tobacco- particularly those doped with burn accelerants and unlabeled Virginia Bright Leaf coffin nails.

The man must be some variety of a frat boy.

0 0

By: Hope

Hope — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 12:59:00 +0000

I just don’t know whether to laugh or cry, every time I see, “man the barricades” or “To the Barricades — for Freedom!”.

What? Who? What “barricades”? Where?

Is it some kind of secret signal to other prohibitionists?

Is it a war cry? A rallying cry? What in the heck are they, it sounds like there must be more like him, fixing to do?

What barricades? Has the man lost his mind?

0 0

By: Jon Doe

Jon Doe — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 02:17:48 +0000

Yeah, but you also have to understand that the American natives were first exposed to alcohol in the form of whiskey and rum. Back then non-medicinal liquor was still a relatively new drug even in Europe and gin had just as much a devastating effect in 18th-19th century England as whiskey did among the Native Americans.

0 0

By: paul

paul — Sun, 30 Aug 2009 01:50:30 +0000

About genetic alcohol resistance, I think the theory is that the Old World had alcohol for so long they evolved a certain resistance to the worst (or best) of the effects. Alcohol seems to have hit the New World natives very hard.

0 0

By: DdC

DdC — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 21:45:51 +0000

It (he) might be referring to the not proven “X” chromosome in some alcoholics. 10% have this gene that supposedly predisposes them to become addicted. I guess these warpo’s are claiming then that 90% have overcome the potential of addiction. So since everyone has cannabinoids in their body I guess we’re all predisposed to fire up the doobies… But then the buttheads at the Heritage Foundation always say weird things.

“We can’t go out and find this information because it’s an illegal activity where they shoot you in the back alley if you try to find out, Today we’re making guesses. This will guide us toward a scientific basis.”
~ David Murray, ONDCP
Statistical Assessment Service, Heritage Foundation

0 0

By: Cliff

Cliff — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 18:39:13 +0000

Many even developed DNA resistance to alcoholism.

Where does this guy come up with this? he just throws it out there with no citation, just blabs it out like it is an accepted fact. I have never heard of DNA resistance to alcoholism mentioned anywhere. What a tool.

0 0

By: paul

paul — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 09:25:34 +0000

If Roberts thinks that Cato is “an ally on the right”, he’s got another thing coming. Ally on economic rights, sure, but other conservative issues do not cross over. Cato is libertarian, and they do not agree with much of the mainstream conservative agenda. They are always anti-war, anti prohibition, and in favor of small government and individual rights. The drug war and the drug warriors are pro big government and anti individual rights.

Many conservatives struggle with this, because it is the conservative instinct to distrust government and support individual rights, but drugs are Bad, so they have to make a choice. Unfortunately, principles go out the window more often than not, mostly because everyone can see that drugs are Bad.

Defending alcohol as a safe alternative to drugs is a very weak argument. Everyone knows that alcohol is a scourge that has killed untold millions of victims down through the centuries, erodes health, and inspires violence. And heavy alcohol use most certainly causes cancer in some people.

When he asks how governments will condone marijuana smoking while they tolerate alcohol and tobacco, I think the answer is pretty clear. MJ is not nearly harmful as alcohol and tobacco, and even if it were, government is no stranger to hypocrisy and would find a way to cope. It certainly does with alcohol and tobacco.

0 0