Nice discussion tactic: Fail to support your points, and call the other guy names.

Get back to me when you're not wallowing in your cannibis fog...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

Dude regular assholes don't buy 400 bucks worth of reefer. only people with money and good jobs do that. you know, these "drug addicts" that supposedly have a hard time holding down a job. Only dumbasses have that problem. and you don't have to be a stoner to be a dumbass.

Taken under advisement.

It's dismissed, but I wouldn't want you to whine that I wouldn't consider your opinion.

Four hundred bucks an ounce is pretty fucking stupid...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

You're right.

It takes a special kind of asshole to spend that kind of money on weed...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

if by special you mean with money to burn on frivolous entertainments then yes. I work hard for my money. I'll spend it however the fuck i want to. If you don't like it you can shove it up your ass.

Heavy flow day?

You got pretty pissy pretty fast. That’s funny.

"Shove it up your ass?"

My, how mature and responsive. You don't really do well in the art of discussion, do you?

Drug addicts rarely do.

If you need to support a kickin’ drug habit, have at it.

And by “special” I mean people who are too stupid to do more constructive things with their money…

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

i wasn't speaking to you personally hoss. i was speaking generally. if i want to spend my money i'm going to spend it. if you(and by you i mean anyone who feels they can criticize how i spend my surplus cash that i earned with the sweat of my brow) don't like it you can shove it. meaning i don't really care if you don't like it, its not your money its mine.


News Flash: I don't smoke weed anymore. havent for 2 whole months now. haven't drank either mr snippy. after 2 months weed is no longer in your system in any form. so back off the drug addict kick yeah?

ahh i see. so because you don't see the value of it it must not have any value. right. cause thats a logical view.

A whole two months??

Golly!

A buddy of mine hasn't had a drink in almost 30 years.

He's still an alcoholic...

__________________



For those who have fought to defend it, freedom has a taste the protected will never know...



If it wasn't for double standards, liberals would have no standards at all...

yeah i'm sure he goes to aa too.

i quit smoking because i didn't want to get in trouble with the law because my town is cracking down hard and its not worth the trouble. when its legalized i'm going to smoke again.

seriously dude you need to talk about something you know about and not this. your ignorance is showing.

I have it on good authority, that pot is Good. It is moral and ethical to consume within this context:

I do not smoke pot any longer. But your statement is retarded anyway. That would be like me saying to you: Well, you see champ, you've admitted drinking, so now your a lush. You began this line of rhetoric with your attempts at marginalizing everyone who is pro pot by insinuating that they are "high". Then, when it is turned around on you, you start to whine that: "Drug addicts often try to shift the spotlight off themselves". Are you trying to say your a drug addict? Is this a cry for help?
Steve, using your logic, if you drink, your a lush. If you get high, your a stoner. How do you like your logic when its turned on you?

Says the lush.
Pay "it"? What is "it" in lushanese?

Law abiding drug addicts can hold down a job as opposed to non law abiding drug addicts? I'm confused. You appear to be contradicting yourself. Do you lose your train of thought between belches?

I would Steve, but I make it a habit not to lie to myself as well as others. Perhaps you should come to terms with the fact that not everyone who is anti pot prohibition is a "stoner"...ok.

__________________
It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning. Henry Ford

On a side note, Back when I used to smoke pot it cost $10.00 an ounce. And they were called "lids". A "lid" was measured by placing your fingers up to the baggie the pot was in. A full "lid" was 4 fingers from the bottom of the baggie to the top. It was all the same grade of pot. We called it "commercial". The first hybrid weed I ever smoked was called "Acapulco gold" which sold for the, at that time, ridiculously high price of $40.00 for 4 "fingers".
I'm telling you this to illustrate just how long ago I smoked pot.

__________________
It is well that the people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning. Henry Ford

Most people have their pleasures. Some people go to Vegas 4 times a year. Some people pay 400 dollars for a purse, some people spend a couple hundred a week going to bars. I know of several couples who spend 1,000 dollars a month going to bars. Are all of these things stupid to you?

An ounce of weed lasts me a month-2 months. I like it, as it relaxes me after dealing with closed minded people on discussion forums and idiots at work.

You can say it is stupid if you want to, but it is MY MONEY. I EARNED IT AND I CAN SPEND IT ANY WAY I WANT TO.

Now, here is what I call stupid.........

Record-breakers were legion. They included a jeroboam of Mouton-Rothschild 1945 from the private cellar of Baroness Philippine de Rothschild (Mouton's owner) that sold in February at Aulden Cellars-Sotheby's for $310,700. At NYWinesChristie's in May, an anonymous bidder on the telephone paid $237,000 for a dozen bottles of the highly acclaimed DRC Romanée-Conti 1985. At Zachys in May, a 42-bottle vertical of Screaming Eagle Cabernet Sauvignon from 1998-2003 fetched $130,900 against an estimate of $50,000 to $80,000. Deep pockets lined with gold are now a prerequisite to playing the high-end of the price spectrum.

Wine Auctions Draw Record Prices in First Half of 2007 | Articles | Wine Spectator

damn dude that was a long time ago. acapulco gold came out in the early 70's right?

Last Gold I saw was in 1980.