Stats

Comments Posted By Assumed Name

Displaying 121 To 150 Of 203 Comments

Short Posts

Yes, Nirek, I agree. (I doubt many carrying it in their back poctect have taken the time to read it or, if they have, realized that its interpretation is in the details of the history of court precedent and federal agencies’ rules and policies. Pints in quart bottles all.)

» Posted By Assumed Name On October 14, 2013 @ 6:55 am

…you said what I often think. *smiles*

» Posted By Assumed Name On October 14, 2013 @ 6:50 am

FYI (This method of subverting the law through constitutional amendment and through legislation is increasing amongst the far right.)

“False Equality in Michigan,” NYT Opinion Page, Editorial Board, 13 October 2013.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/opinion/false-equality-in-michigan.html?hp&_r=0

» Posted By Assumed Name On October 14, 2013 @ 6:44 am

Along the lines with comments ref. Tea Party & current shut down crisis (Rachel Maddow):

http://www.nbcnews.com/id/27201422#53260998

» Posted By Assumed Name On October 14, 2013 @ 1:30 am

New electronics–sweet!

» Posted By Assumed Name On October 9, 2013 @ 7:02 pm

…my. (Malala.)

» Posted By Assumed Name On October 9, 2013 @ 4:45 pm

Only 1/3? (Much better than I would have guessed!)

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 22, 2013 @ 1:16 pm

Yum!! *smiles*

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 14, 2013 @ 7:50 am

Kilgore, I’ve been turned (or at least knocked off the fence) by the combined efforts from you and AdLib.

Kind regards,
Assumed

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 13, 2013 @ 7:16 am

Okay, okay: marijuana should get a blanked pass for legalization (with age, place, and heavy machinery restriction, of course). I consider myself fun at a party, and you’re all welcome to any I throw, but no cigarettes, cigars, or weed!! 😉

Best,
–Assumed

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 13, 2013 @ 7:14 am

Ad Lib, I don’t consider myself naive, but I found Bloomberg’s response simply stunning. I can’t decide whether he’s delusional or a garden variety political liar: the decreases in crime he blithely attributes to stop and frisk occurred before the practice was instituted and, indeed, before he ever took office.

The judge in the case, alas, did not abolish stop and frisk as the practice per se is considered constitutional. (!) She only substantively touched upon disparate racial impact. Even so, it was an important victory for New York’s black and Latino man. (One of the complainants was interviewed by Lawrence last evening–you could just see the pain in his face as he recounted his unprovoked run-ins with “New York’s finest.” It affected almost every aspect of his public life–how he dressed, with whom he associated, when and where he traveled. Again, Bloomberg’s response is simply stunning.)

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 13, 2013 @ 7:05 am

(…except for a daily cup of java and admitted chocolate snorting I’m pretty much drug free. ;))

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 9:31 pm

Hmm…I don’t doubt your experience, Kilgore, but it is a data set of one.

For now, maybe we’ll simply agree to disagree? (Fences are murder on the bum so, who knows? Perhaps I’ll come down sooner rather than later. *smiles*)

All the best,
Assumed

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 9:12 pm

I’m not one for writing lots, so I was waiting for someone else to mention it, but I can wait no longer: NYC’s stop & frisk was found to be racially discriminatory: HURRAH!! 😀

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 9:06 pm

I agree: it’s not as bad as, say, baby Hitler, but it’s too close for comfort.

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 8:23 pm

Ooo…I’m sorry to have missed that! (Your daughter has sophisticated tastes…my son likes all manner of science and history shows, but for entertainment he’s stickin’ to Sponge Bob despite Mom’s best efforts to influence him otherwise. *smiles*)

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 8:00 pm

Hi Ad Lib,

I agree that imprisoning people for possession is overkill. I would, however, make a distinction between hard drugs (e.g., meth) and soft (e,g., marijuana). I think another issue is hat marijuana can be dangerous when laced (of course) with harder drugs. But I digress: you’ve hit upon the one issue that pulls me toward complete legalization, and that’s the unfair sentencing for possession.

That’s all I’ve got!! *smiles*

Cheers,
Assumed

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 7:38 pm

Kilgore,

Medicinal distribution centers in California have been hard hit by the feds even though they’re legal. This was (if no longer is?) a big problem esp. Since the owners were small business people who too often couldn’t survive being hit and/or temporarily shut down. Also, in Michigan, there’s a black market for medicinal medication cards, as well, which brings a criminal and too often violent element into the mix. The federal government, in the instance of raiding legitimate small businesses, is very much in the wrong; the legalizing of medicinal marijuana becomes problematic given both the Casius case (employer drug testing) and the black market for marijuana underscores the problem of making marijuana “half legitimate/half illicit.”

Okay, so all of that.

Still, your well meant hyperbolic claim that marijuana is one of the safest substances on the planet isn’t true. There are issues on health with heavy long term use, use in adolescents who are not fully developed, and much still unknown about its effects given how long it remains in one’s system. It also has similar indications for cigarette smoke when burned.

I hear you (…as well as too many student presentations than I can count :b ). I remain, however, on the fence regarding recreational marijuana. (This is an academic question of my support as I assume that sooner or later recreational marijuana will be widely legalized.)

Peace,
Assumed

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 7:32 pm

Hmm…that’s true enough. I guess the question becomes to what extent is one impaired? (Taking an antihistamine for hay fever is markedly different from, say, hard liquor on the impairment front. *smiles*)

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 7:16 pm

Hi Kilgore,

By “ostracize” I meant laws that keep people from smoking at work, at restaurants, in stores and malls, etc. that is I was thinking of prohibiting public use as ostracism (which goes to show you should say what you mean *smiles*).

If I were going to consume, I would rather use vapor as opposed to smoke due to health concerns…and given my constantly baking, I could see the brownie option as being attractive…yet the latter would pose a problem for children (not unlike flavored cigarettes) and the former would probably not appeal to our convenience culture. In addition, there’s still that pesky little problem of operating machinery while under the influence and how to gage how much is too much, thus creating liability.

Oh, dear: have to check multiplication problems. (My poor son is being forced to keep up his math, spelling, and reading skills during the summer break.) Excuse any typos, etc.

Cheers,
Killjoy…I mean “Assumed” *smiles*

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 6:06 pm

Indeed!! *big grin*

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 5:51 pm

The parents should appeal.

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 10:54 am

I hear you, Nierk, but unless I’m mistaken, legalization of marijuana isn’t “all or nothing”: it’s possible, as in Michigan, to legalize it medicinally while prohibiting recreationally. On that note, I’m unabashedly a supporter of medicinal marijuana, but I’m on the fence regarding legalizing its recreational use. That said, even when legalized as a prescription drug people are still penalized for using it, e.g., the Casio (sp?) v Walmart case.

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 12, 2013 @ 10:42 am

…sounds lovely, Sally. (Old/older classics are a delight…I’m into Hitchcock– Rear Window, The Man Who Knew Too Much, To Catch A Thief–and anything with Bogart.)

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 11, 2013 @ 8:42 pm

…delusion is as blissful as ignorance. *smiles*

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 11, 2013 @ 8:39 pm

Hi Nierk,

Interesting topic. I’ve no issues with medicinal marijuana, but I’m on the fence regarding legalizing its recreational use even though it’s not necessarily as addictive (if at all) as is nicotine. One issue is that it stays in the body for a longer period of time than, say, alcohol…it’s not clear how it could be tested for driving under the influence in the way alcohol can (unless I’ve missed some new development). I also, personally, don’t like the smell of smoke…it’s smelly, gets in your hair and clothing, and is an imposition respitorially if, like myself, you’re a non-smoker. If llegalized for recreational use, it should definitely be ostracized along with cigarettes. (In my “humble” opinion. 😉 )

Best,
Assumed

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 11, 2013 @ 8:37 pm

Kes, I’ve never lived through a natural disaster–how frightening!! It’s good to hear, however, that your community continues to mend and rebuild. It certainly takes time and patience.

–Assumed

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 10, 2013 @ 6:03 am

Hi, kes. Although I agree that the house, an inanimate object, is value-free, it does have “use value” and social meaning beyond being a humble abode. No on is unable to undo the horrors Castro inflicted within its walls, but the ability to destroy the house is, I imagine for neighbors and their children, a part of their psychological healing, no small part of which is guilt in addition to fear. (At least that’s my take.)

On that note, “Timber!!” …or whatever is appropriate to shout.

–Assumed

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 8, 2013 @ 10:56 am

Thanks, Funk–I **love** the idea of a hassle free came topper. Unfortunately we found pre-mixed, colored, ready-to-go fondant yesterday afternoon (idea discovered by my Google surfing son): he’s made a computer graphic of the design he wants to make and is good to go. (It takes the pressure off in that I’m now only responsible for a block chocolate cake with green icing. *smile* )

–AN

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 8, 2013 @ 10:43 am

Aw…and I know you’ve told her so, as well. (Words of appreciation are always appreciated. *smiles*)

» Posted By Assumed Name On August 7, 2013 @ 12:14 pm