Drug War

That Slam Against Pot Smokers Came Out of Nowhere, Man

|

Today on Fox News, former New Hampshire Gov. John Sununu said President Obama "has no idea how the American system functions," adding, "We shouldn't be surprised about that, because he spent his early years in Hawaii smoking something." Sununu, who served as George H.W. Bush's chief of staff, was responding to Obama's recent comment that "if you've got a business, you didn't build that"—which was indeed pretty dumb, or at least poorly phrased, even in the context of an argument about government's role in creating the infrastructure on which entrepreneurs rely. But Sununu's Joe Fridayish response is, if anything, even dumber. Many brilliant achievers in business and other fields, after all, spent part of their high school or college years "smoking something"—an experience so common in Obama's generation (and mine) that never smoking pot marks one as deviant. Judging from his persistent refusal to deny reports that he smoked marijuana, Obama's Republican predecessor—the son of Sununu's former boss—was once a cannabis consumer as well. Yet noted pain pill popper Rush Limbaugh thinks invoking Obama's marijuana use is a winning strategy. Here is the attack Limbaugh recommends that Mitt Romney use against Obama:

Look, pal, when I was out creating jobs, investing in businesses, and growing this economy, you were at Columbia smoking weed and snorting coke. You write about it in your book. You talk about how you got into Columbia and the Harvard Law Review, and you didn't have to do anything. That's what was great about it to you! You loved getting into Columbia 'cause all you had to do was go to class, get your grades, and smoke a little weed! Well, I was out building the country when you were doing that.

Romney, a Mormon, may indeed have eschewed recreational substances his entire life, but many Republican politicians, including several who ran for the presidential nomination or considered doing so this time around, have, like Obama, admitted smoking pot. Should the ideas of Newt Gingrich, Gary Johnson, Mitch Daniels, and Sarah Palin be dismissed on that basis? How long will Republicans continue to smirkingly insinuate that something most American adults born after World War II have done makes them unsuited for public office? At least as long as old hacks like Sununu are still breathing, I guess.

If Obama's drug use is relevant, it's in the context of imposing life-disrupting sanctions on people who do as he did but are not lucky enough to get away with it. His experience should have led him to oppose the unjust, irrational, and absurdly wasteful use of the criminal justice system to arrest and punish people for smoking something that offends John Sununu. Instead it seems to have made him especially wary of de-escalating the war on drugs, despite promises to do so, lest he supply further ammunition to puerile prohibitionists like Sununu and Limbaugh.

NEXT: Europeans Cut Military Spending During Economic Crisis

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Wow, thanks Reason. I mentioned this earlier – “Being a pot-smoker is a hell of a lot more American than hiding money offshore.”

    1. HURR… Romney… hate… America… Obama… kiss… baby! DURR!

      1. Someday the GOP will find a decent candidate.

        1. Yes… and you will hate that candidate just as much.

        2. Haley Barbour is still alive.
          It’s Haley Barbour’s turn!

        3. And the GOP establishment will make sure to wipe him/her out in the primary.

    2. It’s not really hiding if you tell the IRS about it.

    3. I find them equally American.

      There is little more American than a tradition of evading or ignoring unjust law.

      Pot smokers and offshore bank account tax evaders are the noblest of men, in the tradition of the conductors of the Underground Railroad and the Appalachian moonshiners.

      1. Romney would have been more American if he was hiding his money offshore by shorting tea companies.

      2. Fuck yeah. You can chisel that in stone.

        I used to grow pot! I didn’t realize what a noble calling taking that risk was.

        1. My best friend and I grew it all through HS and into college. Just personal stash so we didn’t have to buy weed.

          We were subsistence farmers and didn’t even know it!

      3. Pot smokers and offshore bank account tax evaders are the noblest of men, in the tradition of the conductors of the Underground Railroad and the Appalachian moonshiners.

        Amen and amen.

    4. Or Dodging the draft to do “Missionary Work” in Paris. BTW, wasn’t Sununu’s Boss at the WH a Drunk and Coke Head? Just asking.

      1. Sununu was CoS to Pa Bush, not Dubya.

    5. Nothing more American than dodging taxes on your business. If we weren’t so contemptuous of the price of civilized society, we’d still be part of civilised society.

  2. good grief. Sununu’s making a point about the stupidity of what Obama said, that he’s never had a record prior to now. And, he’s running away from it and pointing instead to his opponent.

    Get a grip, Jacob.

  3. “Puerile” is too kind a word, Jacob. Your gentlemanly restraint is noted, but probably counterproductive.

  4. Just because I’m in favor of drug legalization, doesn’t mean I can’t consider their use to be personal failing. Call me deviant, I guess.

    1. Do you consider alcohol consumption to be a personal failing?

      1. Coffee, too.

        Horrible personal failing indulged in only by sinners.

        Romney told me that once.

      2. If it’s to the point where it alters one’s mental processes, yes. I don’t respect someone who disrespects their own mind by warping it just for kicks.

        1. Many drugs alter mental processes, and they do it immediately with any dose. Such as nicotine, coffee, alcohol, pot, cocaine, etc. So do painkillers, and some homeopathic crap too.

          I hope you don’t think your respect is really worth having if you can’t figure that out. Making arbitrary delineations based on government propaganda isn’t the sign of a very sharp thinker.

          Maybe you could use some altered mental processes. It might make you less of a dumbass.

          1. Many drugs alter mental processes, and they do it immediately with any dose.

            Unless you’re taking alcohol or caffeine intravenously it ain’t going to do that.

            Also, there’s nothing wrong with disparaging mind-altering drugs so long as one doesn’t advocate coercive measures.

            1. I think gamblers are moral degenerates of the lowest sort.

            2. And there’s nothing wrong with me slamming him for a totally arbitrary and moronic disparagement.

              You could probably use some altered mental processes too. In your case, it might make you less of a douchebag.

            3. And there is nothing wrong with disparaging those who look down on those who take mind-altering drugs. It’s a two way fucking street.

              1. But then you’re disparaging people, not activities.

                You catch more roaches with pot than you do with butthash.

            4. Unless you’re taking alcohol or caffeine intravenously it ain’t going to do that.

              Smoking actually gets the drug into your system faster than IV. The only problem is, you can only fit so much smoke in your lungs. IV is limited only by the size of the chamber of the syringe.

              A doctor by the name of Lance Gooberman told me that. He invented the Naltrexone implant and was one of the first doctors to do rapid opiate detox in the US.

              1. there’s a reason why a lot of spracktastic opioid addicts smoke oxycodone

                1. there’s a reason why a lot of spracktastic opioid addicts smoke oxycodone

                  I think they call it chasing the dragon

              2. Let me know when you find a way to smoke alcohol and caffeine.

                1. A vodka soaked tampon works just as well, I hear.

                  And caffeine? Who needs caffeine when you can have shards.

                2. Uh, they’re called vaporizers for the alcohol, Tulpa, you blithering idiot.

          2. And maybe you might be less of a dumbass if you read my post more closely. I said “for kicks.” I’m not talking about painkillers or other things being used to fix a problem.

            Furthermore, you’d be even less of a dumbass if you didn’t assume to know the basis on which I form my opinions. I’d seen drunk and drugged (was overseas in a country where opium was semi-legal) people and decided “I’m never doing something so idiotic” well before I’d seen or heard any government propaganda on the matter.

            Personally, when I alter my mental processes, I prefer to do it via *thinking*.

            1. No, you seem to do it by being a teetotaler jerkoff who, by your statement, seems never to have even tried what you disparage. Which means you don’t know the first fucking thing about what you’re talking about.

              1. Have you ever broken into a house and shot a dog, Epi? Then stop judging people who have.

                1. That’s an even more retarded analogy than your usual ones, Tulpy-poo. I know you really want to hump my leg, but maybe you should do it less stupidly.

              2. Riiiiight, because observations about what happens to someone else when they do something should *never* have a bearing on whether or not you do that thing yourself.

                Are you *really* that emotionally-invested in your recreation that you always fly off on a profanity-laced rant when someone says “you should be completely free to do it, but I think it’s a bad idea”? I guess I’d better work up some anger next time someone insults anything I enjoy — I’m being far too easygoing, apparently.

                1. Poor baby, did you get insulted? Do you want a juice box to go with your whine?

                  You’re an idiot. The entire experience with drugs…is the experience. It’s mental. You can’t “see” the experience from outside, you fucking retard.

                  But nice try making the same type of retarded argument as Tulpa. Maybe you two could get together and hump each other’s legs.

                  1. *facepalm*

                    No, I didn’t get insulted. But you are providing a very good illustration of the inverse correlation between intelligence of argument vs. volume of profanity and personal attacks.

                    Wait, you’re secretly a DEA mole, aren’t you? That has to be it. It’s the only way your comments make any sense. Tomorrow, teachers across America will be showing your posts to their classes, with the caption “Just Say No, or you could wind up sounding like this Episiarch guy!” I don’t approve of the government propagandizing captive schoolkids, but I have to grudgingly admire the effectiveness of your strategy. Bravo!

                    1. The moron who has never even tried drugs but just knows they’re bad is claiming an intelligent argument.

                      That’s fucking hilarious.

                    2. Actually I was claiming that *your* argument *wasn’t* intelligent, and observing that a high frequency of profanity and personal insults is a good marker for lack of intellect. You’re validating my prediction just fine, thanks.

                      According to you, it seems, a “moron” means a person who sees folks puking into the toilet and complaining about their aching heads, and thinks “no way it can be good enough to justify *that*.” To me, that’s called learning from other people’s mistakes.

            2. What you were seeing was Darwinism in action. Those who can’t handle the challenge presented by hard core drugs fall by the way side, those of us who can are stronger for the experience. It was hardly a ‘dumbass’ experience to test my limitations (didn’t find any).

              1. Actually the saki I had at the local Asahi Japanese steakhouse did a bigger number on me than anything mescaline or mushrooms did to me. At least with the mushrooms the puking was immediate, and not lingering with dry heaves two days afterwards.

                1. holy shit sissy mary, how much of a lightweight are you?

                  1. Koji wasn’t fully processed. Mold gets up into you, you’re fucked. I could tell at the time while drinking it, but I decided what the hell, a little puking and the shits later at the worst.

                    1. I was a little concerned there. Although I never have an adverse reaction to mold, so I didn’t see where that could be a problem.

                2. i’m not a puritan. imo, using drugs to seek a high is not a bad thing. again, as long as one’s use of drugs does not mean one ignores family duties, etc.

                  man has always sought transcendent experiences. heck, many argue that religion has drug like effects. god knows food does.

                  fwiw, there are a LOT of exceptionally potent highs one can get from perfectly legal drugs. alcohol is the tip of the iceberg. there are a # of designer drugs that are meth-like in strength but still legal (analogues that don’t fit into the criteria.. yet) and lots of other drugs e.g. kratom, kava kava that can be pretty strongly intoxicating

                  1. Exactly, I drink alcohol for the kick, but for hard core drugs before I was married and had a kid, it was entirely about testing myself. I’m the kind of person whom if the Gates of Hell were open for an hour, I would have to experience it first hand to see what it was like before deciding whether it was the right or the wrong thing for me.

                  2. kava kava that can be pretty strongly intoxicating

                    You tried it? More like baby klonopins. Strongly intoxicating isn’t the descriptor I’d use. I use both the tea and the extract.

                    1. Baby Klonopins? So is it like chasing half a benedryl with an O’Douls?

                    2. Not really. It’s definitely a tranq, and not just a downer. The problem is, to get enough to really tear it up, you’d be damaging your liver something fierce. Even a handfull of the strong ones just makes you feel like you took half a k-pin. The liquid extract is better, but even several doses of that just feels like a small Valium.

                    3. So is it like chasing half a benedryl with an O’Douls?

                      Ha! My thoughts exactly.

        2. Former PCP consumer here and my mind is a laser compared to whatever the fuck is bumbling around in your head.

          1. so he doesn’t like drug heads. And? He’s not advocating the storm troopers barrel into your house. His is an opinion, not a policy statement.

            1. If it’s to the point where it alters one’s mental processes, yes. I don’t respect someone who disrespects their own mind by warping it just for kicks.

              Fuck off and split if you don’t want to get caught in the shrapnel. I’m responding to a direct insult.

              1. you’re insulted by a guy who did not share your habits? Seriously? Set a higher bar for griefing. Seeing as how you stopped PCP, seems you did not think it a great idea, either.

                1. wareagle, it is certainly offensive to say that someone who enjoys certain substances is less deserving of respect, yes? I mean, if I said the same thing about video gamers or libertarians who argue on the internet, the insult would be implied, if not outright present.

                  1. maybe randian; I just find it easier to ignore smug, self-righteous pronouncements like David’s. You can’t argue with folks like that.

                    Much more impressive, to me anyway, is killaz getting away from PCP. Nasty stuff.

                    1. Much more impressive, to me anyway, is killaz getting away from PCP. Nasty stuff.

                      Though it’s one of the few I haven’t tried, I suspect that, just like everything else, it’s ill effects have been overblown.

                    2. It had its own feel to it, but nothing overwhelming. Felt more sociable and dickish, opposite of Xtcy which makes feel goofy and flakey. I hate X for that. Hallucinogenic quality more difficult to describe. Moments seemed more compartmentalized. I can only speak for myself though.

                    3. No it isn’t. Maybe not the greatest thing since sliced bread but it is on par with the pre-sliced “hamburger dill-chip” as far as inventions go.

                  2. wareagle, it is certainly offensive to say that someone who enjoys certain substances is less deserving of respect, yes?

                    Offensive? No way. Not every disagreement rises to the level of offense.

                2. you’re insulted by a guy who did not share your habits?

                  Maybe he’s insulted by a guy who says, “Because of what you do, I don’t respect you.”

                  That sounds like an insult to me. It’s the fucking perfect Platonic Form of an insult.

        3. Welcome to H+R, David. I see you’ve met Episiarch.

          1. many drugs actually improve mental processes fwiw, up to certain doses.

            cocaine, like caffeine, can improve alertness, driving performance and test scores UP TO A CERTAIN POINT (see U shaped dose response curves hth)

            now god knows mj doesn’t fall into that camp, but there’s nothing wrong with a little mind numbing, whether it’s through alcohol or pot

            i personally think pot is lame as fuck, but i don’t think there is any moral failing in smoking it

            smoking it to excess where one neglects one’s duty to family, etc. is another thing entirely, but the same thing could be said about people who play video games ot excess and ignore family duties.

            1. or posting on H+R on cop threads.

              1. (looks over shoulder)

                btw, my two favorite take-aways from the anti-cop bigots

                1) knocking on a door = a RAID

                lol

                2) the idea that showing basic RESPECT towards cops (and people in general) is a call for RIMJOBS etc.

                iirc, it was sarcasmic, but regardless, the bigots are so hateful they can’t even consider that it’s just common decency to be respectful to people IN GENERAL

                note: being respectful doesn’t imply being servile, or fawning or giving “rimjobs”

                i can give an auto thief basic respect when i arrest him, but it’s apparently the height of wrongness to dare be respectful to a cop

                hint: it’s the right thing to do

                1. Our overgrown toddler boy in blue is looking for some attention.

                  1. How cute, dunphy and Tulpa have finally found each other.

                2. dunphy,
                  did you miss this week’s story of the guy who committed the crime of opening his own front door at 1:30am? Turns out that carries the death penalty.

                  1. No, he actually said the guy got what he deserved because “fuck him.”

                  2. Let’s make up some more facts!

                    1. He actually did say that, Tulpa. Which I note you have yet to disclaim.

                    2. That was meant as a reply to Waregale.

                    3. He did open his door at 1:30, and he did die. So what were the made up facts again?

                    4. I was addressing wareagle’s actual comment, not your slicing and dicing of it. I know you’ve appointed yourself universal editor and interpreter of everyone else’s comments, but I prefer to stick with original source material.

                    5. what facts are in question, tulpa? The cops showed up at the guy’s house in the middle of the night; they knocked and he answered; a hail of bullets ensued and he is dead.

                      Yes, he had a gun in his hand but bullets going through the door would indicate he was likely not pointing it at the police. Besides, they had the wrong freaking address; how difficult would it be to ask his name or say who they were or something other than shoot-first-cover-ass-later.

                    6. Quote the original source, then, and point to the made up facts. Go on…do it. No more whining about how I allegedly misconstrue sources. It’s right fucking there, so go on and quote it already and pick it apart.

                      Please, go ahead.

                    7. and so far, crickets.

                    8. yuuuup, loud, chirping crickets.

                    9. I have no obligation to disclaim other people’s words.

                    10. But you’ll gladly lay into a poster for making a typographical error you consider substantive. But “fuck him he dies”?…no problem!

                    11. If you’re referring to what I think you’re referring to, that was the mother of all typographical errors. Like one that the infinite monkeys would spend a few million years trying to make. And he never said it was that, that was just you trying to put a good face on it after you were losing the argument.

                    12. I was not “losing the argument”. you chose to address the particulars of words rather than the substance and spirit of the argument.

                    13. And of course that’s a red herring, since no one is claiming I had an obligation to correct that person either. I know free will is a foreign idea to objectivists, but try to put yourself in our shoes.

                3. Dunphy talking smack about respect again, even though he never answered my question about why Sergeant Custer didn’t also have to obey the “respect everybody or don’t complain when you get bad results” rule.

                  1. Maybe you should track him down with a video camera and post his response on YouTube.

        4. I don’t respect stuck-up teetotalers so the feeling is mutual.

          1. 0.5% forever! That’s the attitude.

              1. That image will never get old.

                1. That image will never get old.

                  So long as you have the right state of mind. Like my 4-year old niece playing Care Bare dominoes for hours on end.

                1. Do Epi’s farts smell like schnozzberry, Randian?

                  1. Yes. And so do your mom’s.

        5. Utilizing the respect stance is like wielding an invisible sword. No one gives a shit. Really, who CARES if you disrespect the ‘mind-warper’?

          “Hey, guys/gals out there in the hinterlands, David Emami doesn’t respect you for getting stoned or drunk.”

          Silence.

          “GUYS, DAVID EMAMI DOESN”T RESPECT YOU FOR BEING STONED!”

          “Hey, Agile, tell David Emami to shut the FUCK up and leave us alone. Thanks, bro.”

          ‘Bout the sum of it.

  5. Bullshit memes foisted on the populace with propaganda die hard.

    The “having public evidence that you did drugs is political poison” is one of those memes. Even if it’s not true (the last 3 presidents were known to have done drugs), politicians are scared of it, because it used to be true. And constant, blatant anti-drug propaganda from the government doesn’t help.

    1. I’m kind of excited to see politicians in 20-30 years explain their Facebook pictures/posts.

      1. The kind of people who grow up to become politicians tend to know that they want this power from an early age. Anyone going into politics will probably have gone well out of their way to keep their lives as squeaky clean as possible (at least in terms of public knowledge) and that will include their Facebook or other social media.

        1. You have more faith in 20 year olds than I do.

          1. I have faith in the ability of the power hungry to be careful not to do things that will keep them from attaining power in the future. Not all of them, but the ones who really want it.

            You know, the worst ones.

            1. Obama didn’t stop himself from doing drugs (and at that point it still looked like it would be a showstopper).

        2. nah…FB and the rest will mark the end of looking at someone’s distant past, as they should. What someone did at a kegger 35 years ago is irrelevant.

          1. I see this as a distinct possibility, which on one hand is good, but on the other poltician-hating-hand, is boring.

            1. who knows..maybe it will cause the electorate to consider things that matter as opposed to, well, articles like this one.

              1. There is far to much vested in keeping the electorate from considering things that matter for that to ever change. If it’s not drugs, it’ll be something else.

                “Ohh, he said ‘faggot’ on x-box live when he was 12.”

            2. but on the other poltician-hating-hand, is boring.

              Hey, no worries. We can still hate the politicians of the future for stomping on freedom.

  6. Nah, what Obama said was dumber. At least stereotypical slacker-stoners actually exist.

    1. Oh, and O/T:

      Go to my FB page and like it.

      http://www.facebook.com/SmallB…..ainstObama

      1. Along the same line:

        http://didntbuildthat.com/

        1. Nice!

    2. God. I haven’t heard that in years. It could be many more and I still wouldn’t miss it.

      1. The irony is, it’s just as relevant today, as it was 35 years ago, as Shitead Sununu has just proved.

  7. If the attack works use it.I don’t see any advantage in alluding to Obama’s drug use but it should be no more “off limit” than the Dems attacking Mittens for having offshore investments (just like they do).

  8. I’m deviant.

  9. Sununu is a Cuban born of Palestinian lineage — the irony is incredible with wingnuts.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_H._Sununu

  10. The funny thing about Limbaugh’s advice is that I imagine Romney threw more man-hours down the black hole of zero productivity that is being a Mormon missionary than Obama wasted on pot smoking.

    I really don’t want to hear productivity lectures from somebody who threw away a couple of years selling snake oil to Frenchmen.

    It was a totally legitimate choice for Romney to do that, if that’s what he wanted to do with his time, but it definitely wasn’t “peak productivity” time. Having done it, he doesn’t get to demand that other people account for the use of their time.

    I bet Romney could have added a little to the GDP during the time when he was assaulting a gay schoolmate.

    1. Assault? Really? The guy is dead and his family says there is nothing there. Besides, the real point is being missed here: Obama, who has done nothing but talk his whole life, is whining about someone who actually has been productive.

      That Romney surrogates harped on the pot angle is a nice diversion for the Reason staff, but it is even less meaningless than pearl-clutching over Romney’s bank accounts. I guess, for you, religious bigotry is a much more stand-up position than cheap shots about drug use.

      1. It isn’t bigotry to point out that Mormon missionary work is no more productive than smoking pot.

        1. In my youthful “missionary days”I converted a lot more people to pot smoking than Romney did to Mormonism.

          1. On two separate occasions in college, I successfully converted Southern Baptist Campus Crusaders to deism (I was an atheist, but ya know, baby steps) while high.

        2. when you refer to it as selling snake oil, pretty much is. You don’t care for religion, okay; don’t care for it. You want to take pointless cheap shots; not so okay.

          Point remains, Jacob dug awfully deep to manufacture some outrage in order to write this piece. And, it wasn’t even Romney who said anything.

          1. It’s a product whose usefulness cannot be proven or tested.

            I think that makes it snake oil.

            The real reason the term isn’t appropriate is because snake oil is actually a product and manufacturing it and selling it would be a productive activity.

            1. You and I have different definitions of the word productive, though I agree with the religion argument.

              How about a counterfactual: what if Romney was spreading peace-loving doctrine to backwards tribes? Now, I may despise religions, but it seems to be that it would be productive to try to substitute one actively harmful brand of snake oil for one whose results are largely harmless.

            2. Mormons are healthier and wealthier and more genetically successful than the non-Mormon population. Some value those things as useful.

              1. But are they happier?

              2. more genetically successful

                Really, they have a lower rate of genetic defects or something?

                1. They are more reproductively successful, I would bet, which could be equivalent to genetic success. Also, they’re strangely more attractive than your average bear, so that’s gotta mean something.

                2. Quantity is Quality.

                  1. the obvious exercise would be to compare mormon’s rate of social pathology (crime rate, STD rate, earning power, %age on welfare, etc.) with the public at large.

                    if they are “better” on those fronts, then one could argue conversion might have utility

                    fwiw, in the US, two of the most successful demographics are japanese americans and jews.

                    a jewish japanese american would be a perfect storm of model minority

                    1. No, guys.

                      It would still be snake oil, because the advertised benefit of the product hasn’t been verified.

                      The advertised benefit of Mormonism is that after you die, you become a god and get to go to another planet and create your own race of people.

                      Mormons seem like a happy lot, but that’s an incidental benefit of Mormonism (maybe) and not its advertised benefit.

                      Snake oil, similarly, would be advertised to cure cancer and rheumatism and other diseases. It didn’t do that, but since it was usually part alcohol, it might give you a nice buzz. But the nice buzz didn’t prove that snake oil “worked”, in the sense of actually providing its advertised and claimed benefits.

                    2. I would argue that the happiness / health piece of Mormonism is not merely an incidental, unadvertised benefit.

      2. Besides, the real point is being missed here

        I just told you what the real point was.

        The real point is that Romney surrogates are espousing a standard of judgment their own candidate can’t measure up to.

        If it’s appropriate to judge pot smokers because they are failing to achieve peak productivity at all times, it’s appropriate to judge Mormon missionaries the same way.

        To reiterate what Apatheist said, it really doesn’t matter what we think of Mormons one way or another – being an unpaid religious missionary is a personal indulgence and a 0 productivity activity, every bit as unproductive as sitting around smoking pot.

        1. you are falling into the false argument that Sullum is making. Romney being a missionary is irrelevant. For that matter, so is whatever Obama did in college.

          The point is that Team Obama is attacking a guy who did something as a means of defending a guy who, until now, had no record of having done anything. His own team won’t defend Obama’s record, so it attacks the opponent’s character.

          This has nothing to do with pot, no matter how much Jacob might wish it to. The only folks raising the mission meme are you and some others; it’s not Romney and it’s not anyone in his camp. It is as false flag an argument as can be, but I guess Reason has to manufacture a quota of drug-related stories if enough of the real ones don’t surface.

          1. No, dude.

            Sununu and Limbaugh made a clear and distinctive argument.

            You can say, “WAAAAHHHH! They only made that argument because of the unfair Bain attacks!” but they still made it.

            Since they made it, I get to address it. I’m under no obligation to try to force it to make sense in the context of a broader argument. It’s their responsibility to not insult my intelligence while making their arguments.

            1. I have no idea what argument Sununu is making, but you are right about Limbaugh, although you could read that as a matter of political advice rather than a standard against which to judge all activity.

              1. Sununu’s argument is that while Romney was building a company and all the rest, Obama was pretty much a leech. That he used a bad analogy attracted our fair scribe who has since tried to make the issue into a favored them here.

    2. Family denied the guy was gay, and he was picked on for looking like Andy Warhol with long bleached hair on a prep school campus in 1965.

      1. Hey, fine.

        But during the 15 minutes Romney was planning and executing that assault, he could have been planning or undertaking a productive activity.

        That means he fails the Hank Rearden test and we must scorn him as unproductive for all time.

        1. just stop. Romney’s not the one making Obama’s past habits an issue. POTUS and surrogates picked a stupid fight and they are getting blowback.

          Sullum is finding faux outrage and the flock is dutifully falling in line.

        2. Note, Fluffy, that the ROMNIAC defense from the HitUndRunpublicans is ramping up, just as predicted.

          1. I will say, though, that this is faux outrage, on that I agree with wareagle. How often do you hear Person A, in response to something crazy Person B says, say “What are you smoking?” or “If you’re holding onto the good shit, share, because you’re obviously *on* something”

            It’s a common expression.

          2. oh good…it’s Team No Team toeing the Sullum line. Jacob wants to gin up outrage among the faithful and is having some success. Looks like sheep come in colors beyond red and blue.

            1. Dream on, TEAM RED stooge. I don’t give a shit what Sununu did; he’s just another TEAM RED flack like you. I’m here to see all the HitUndRepublicans like you come out and start shilling for ROMNIAC, just like I said you would.

              1. of course, you give a shit; it’s why you ignore the pointlessness of this article and jump on the Team bandwagon. Then again, you’re the same guy who claims to be an anarchist but is unsure as to what it is.

                1. The perennial defense of the TEAM shithead: claim that I’m on the other TEAM. God, you’re fucking stupid. Partisan fucks like you have such limited mental capacity that the only thing you can comprehend is being on a TEAM. Is being this stupid painful?

                  1. seems a question you are perfectly equipped to answer, though self-awareness is not a likely strong suit. As usual, the team theme was raised by you.

                    1. The TEAM theme was raised as soon as you went FULL TEAM RED SHILL.

                      Nice try, though. Well, not really. More kind of idiotic.

                    2. get the sand out of your pussy; it’ll make you feel better. Alternatively, read back through the thread. Team talk is epi talk.

                    3. …and TEAM shill is your talk.

                  2. The problem is you’re so insistent on not appearing to be on a team that you wrap around the other end of the teamhood torus and become part of an anti-team.

            2. Jacob wants to gin up outrage among the faithful and is having some success. Looks like sheep come in colors beyond red and blue.

              If John Sununu persists in saying outrageous things, I will persist in being outraged.

              1. Woah, again, is it not common parlance to suggest that someone is a step or two behind because they are ‘smoking something’? I believe that it is.

                1. I’m with Fuffy, although I don’t think it’s outrageous so much as stupid.

                  1. I’m not even sure how big of a deal the junior Sununu is in Republican circles. Is he worth the attention here in the sense that he is getting more attention than he otherwise would, or is he a bigger deal than I’m aware of?

                2. Woah, again, is it not common parlance to suggest that someone is a step or two behind because they are ‘smoking something’? I believe that it is.

                  What does this have to do with anything?

                  My position is not that pot smoking is like building a suspension bridge or finding a cure for cancer.

                  My position is that you don’t get to hold up your candidate as the be-all and end-all of productivity when he dicked around in France for a couple of years.

                  1. And what did John Sununu say about Romney’s productivity? You said “When Sununu stops saying outrageous things, I’ll stop being outraged”, but what did he say exactly that was so outrageous again?

                    1. Sununu made the drug analogy – not a particularly smart one – Sullum saw a drug article and that, predictably, riled the faithful. Had Sununu used anything other than pot use to equate Obama with being a slacker, there would be no article.

                    2. Your projection is hilariously epic. You see ROMNIAC getting given shit by Sullum, rush here to defend him, get called out for that, and your defense is to project your exact actions on the people who call you out on it.

                      Hilariously epic…and hilariously pathetic.

                    3. no, I see Sullum ginning up an excuse to resurrect the drug meme and folks like you falling dutifully in line. Nice job.

                      The drug analogy is the sum total of Sullum’s outrage. Maybe your condition is congenital.

                    4. Sununu specifically said that Romney was better than Obama because Obama smoked pot at college and in law school, and Romney was, instead, productive and “building the country”.

                      It’s outrageous because, unless Romney pulled a D’Anconia and built a business in college, their undergrad years are a wash. And Obama’s law school years would be just about perfectly offset by Romney’s missionary years.

                      Over the rest of their lives, Romney was obviously much more productive than Obama. But going by the argument Sununu actually made and not the better one we can make up for him now, Sununu’s statement is silly.

                      I am not John Roberts. I am not going to find a way to restate Sununu’s argument to not make it dumb.

                    5. No, that is not what Sununu said. He said Obama has no idea how the American system functions, that he spent his years in Hawaii smoking something. It’s in the first paragraph, fluffy. There is no comparison of their respective college years.

                      The article chooses to take issue with the terms of the analogy rather than the analogy itself. Has Romney been more productive than Obama? Looks like.

                      You don’t have to re-state Sununu’s argument; you just have to read it.
                      It has nothing to do with college or missions or law school.

                    6. Limbaugh said the “building the country” remark, Fluffy. Sununu said nothing of the kind. Did you watch the video?

          3. There’s no concern trolling worse than glib concern trolling, Episiarch.

            1. Except for Tulpical concern trolling.

          4. You’re a regular Nostradamus. Watch me predict that the next time a cop shoots someone, H+R will be full of angry commenters saying the cop should be prosecuted.

            1. the two disconnects that are obvious are the zimmerman case vs. the cop who shot the guy who swung the bag of beer at the cop’s head (note: the cop went to the hospital with injuries suffered from being stoved in the melon).

              the former gets HUGE benefit of the doubt (fwiw, *i* give zimmerman the benefit of the doubt, but then i am consistent between cops and noncops) and the latter was clearly unjustified in the bigorati’s eyes.

              if zimmerman was a cop, he would be a racist, trigger happy thug who shot a poor innocent kid (hagiographies for trayvon would be a dime a dozen) for “walking while black”.

              1. I don’t give the cops who shot the guy with a bag of beer the benefit of the doubt because they were dicks for even SPEAKING to the guy with a bag of beer.

                So I’m not inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in the rest of the incident.

                Which, frankly, is exactly my beef with Zimmerman.

                1. You’re totally off the reservation about Zimmerman, AFAIC.

                2. they were CALLED to the scene and EASILY had a valid reason to contact the guy with the bag of beer, since the complaint was about adults buying beer for kids and he left the store CARRYING alcohol and in the company of kids.

                  if he had simply spoken with them, and cooperated it would have been like more terry type contacts, a brief encounter and he would have been on his way

                  regardless, CLEARLY under very fair UOF doctrine the UOF was legal and it was EASILY *more* justifiable than the zimmerman case.

                  beyond benefit of the doubt stuff, there are clear irrefutable case facts supporting their account

                  again, the zimmerman/beer guy disconnect is the perfect example of the ridiculous disconnect

                  cops have the EXACT same right as zimmerman to use force to defend themselves

                  1. You see?

                    This is what you just don’t get about this “respect” bullshit you prattle on about.

                    To me, I have an absolute and unquestioned right to buy a bag of beer and then walk down the street.

                    Unless you see me hand a beer to someone under age, you have no grounds to interfere with me.

                    By asking me to stop, inconveniencing me and subjecting me to the implicit threat of police violence (since I wouldn’t even stop and wouldn’t even acknowledge hearing you if it wasn’t for the threat of violence) you have already treated me with disrespect.

                    I can’t possibly beat you off the mark in the disrespect race. We’re not even having an interaction, unless you’re showing disrespect to me.

                    But even though you have no probable cause to detain me for fucking anything, I have to meekly stop my perfectly legal activity and crawl over to you and let you play Tough Guy Questioner.

                    Fuck you.

                    1. Unless you see me hand a beer to someone under age, you have no grounds to interfere with me.

                      So unless the cops responding to your 911 call see the burglar breaking your window and taking your laptop, they have no right to interfere with him as he walks down the street with a laptop.

                    2. So unless the cops responding to your 911 call see the burglar breaking your window and taking your laptop, they have no right to interfere with him as he walks down the street with a laptop.

                      If I’m walking down the street with MY OWN laptop and a cop comes up and gives me a hard time because some guy two streets over just lost a laptop, don’t expect me to behave with respect.

                      I am being insulted, inconvenienced, and threatened. I am entitled to act like someone who is being insulted, inconvenienced, and threatened.

                      Don’t tell me the cops are “respecting” me and I am obligated to “respect” them because neither is true.

                    3. I can’t possibly beat you off the mark in the disrespect race. We’re not even having an interaction, unless you’re showing disrespect to me.

                      This is like that conversation I had with that steelsomething-or-other (he was another cop who used to post here). He got all offended when I told him he was harassing photographers for a legal activity by stopping them and talking to them to see what they were up to.

                      It’s like they conveniently forget that everything they do carries an implicit threat if violence (at least until it’s time to use it, then they remember both the violence and the magic phrases which justify it’s use in almost every situation).

                  2. since the complaint was about adults buying beer for kids

                    Actually, it was about kids standing around outside asking someone to buy beer for them. There were no complaints about an adult doing anything.

            2. Your retardation is almost complete, Tulpy-poo. You are almost a Jedi Retard.

              Your second moronic analogy of the day, where you equate predicting that angry commenters will be angry to my prediction that a bunch of posters who claim to be libertarians will suddenly start shilling for ROMNIAC, because they are closet TEAM RED.

              Seriously, Tulpy-poo, if you’re going to hump my leg try not to be so incompetent at it.

              1. So the people who support Romney are ipso facto TEAM RED, while those who with few facts immediately side against cops are not a team?

                1. the groupthink, lack of logical thinking, and ideology led primarily by emotion and fealty to an overriding metanarrative are SO SO SO strong in the anti-cop bigots. it’s actually kind of fascinating the way they can just completely ignore evidence, and basic facts and circumstances. it’s *so* team team team rah rah

                  again, the fact that somebody could claim a cop knocking on the door = a RAID or that showing respect to cops is equivalent to giving a rimjob or this insanely easily refuted idea that many hold that excessive force is so common and so easy to get away with, is just insane.

                  guys get fired all the #$#) time for excessive force. forcefully, and the stats are clear- in general, it’s not tolerated.

                  use of force in general is exceedingly rare… a tiny percentage of incidents.

                  there’s plenty of corruption and there are certainly examples of cops getting away with fucked shit, but the lack of proportionality is astounding

                  also, the ability of alleged libertarians to sound like racial card playing liberals WHEN it comes to cop force/arrests etc. is quite telling.

                  again, according to BJS and extensively documented by heather mcdonald at city journal, cop’s disparate arrest rate/force rate etc. vis a vis certain minorities mirrors almost exactly the disparate crime OFFENDER rate of different demographics AS DOCUMENTED BY CRIME VICTIMs

                  it’s simply fascinating to me and i am thankful to be exposed to such insanity

                  1. guys get fired all the #$#) time for excessive force. forcefully, and the stats are clear- in general, it’s not tolerated.

                    Seattle stats beg to differ.

          5. I’m not voting Romney, but I thought the bullying story was an incredible non-story, and I’m suspicious about the current anti-bullying campaign and where it is coming from. Why are informal power structures between kids suddenly the concern of those who tend to official power mongery?

            Just to be clear, no to Romney unless he admits to being a Satanist, and then he loses just about everyone but me, Warty and Marylin Manson.

            No to Romney or any Republican since the tragic mistake of 2000 I made at the ballot box, but, yes, I despise Obama worse than any of them now with the exception of hiz-shit-don’t-stink McCain.

            I hope I can be a consistent critic after November of the Romney regime, and any thanks I have for getting rid of Obama I feel can be held in check knowing a knew shitiness is upon us.

            1. knowing a knew shitiness is upon us.

              Was it the PCP use from a decade ago or this Stone IPA in my hand that caused that homophone?

              1. You are engaging in litotes I assume in your assertion that you are suspicious about the anti-bullying campaign.

                Its way past mere suspicion.

                1. You are engaging in litotes I assume in your assertion that you are suspicious about the anti-bullying campaign.

                  Its way past mere suspicion.

                  True. The ambigiousness comes from not understanding the agenda. The motives of greenies, unionist, feminist, and the like (okay, neocons, socons, centrist, central planners, moveon.orgist, etc) are naked to my eyes, but there still exist an unknown quantity to the anti-bullying brigade that I have not put my finger on. They may even be more dangerous than the above given the hidden motive.

                  1. The ambigiousness comes from not understanding the agenda.

                    The agenda is pretty straightforward.

                    They want to use a real problem (student violence and threats/intimidation against other students) as the wedge to impose a regime where mere social hostility and exclusion is a criminal offense, the better to wedge young people into smothered little junior collectives.

                    1. That being said, if the story was that Romney said to his friends, “That kid’s hair is too long, let’s not let him join our pretend fraternity”, then it would be a non-story.

            2. I’m not voting Romney, but I thought the bullying story was an incredible non-story

              If it could be demonstrated to unequivocably be true, I’d think it was a huge story.

              I knew some guys who would have done that to someone when they were 15. And you know what? None of them should be President.

              It doesn’t matter that he was just a kid. Nobody’s personality changes that much. Nobody “awakens” enough to bounce back from being that kid. If you’re that kid in high school, you will forever be scum. Forever. No backsies.

              1. My sister nine years my senior had a friend named Wanda whom she brought home who liked to pick on me (all of seven at the time). I remember she spat some gum on the ground then dragged my head into to the ground and made me eat it. Terrible, but unforgivable? Nah.

                Then my cousin Marc that same summer, practically made me his slave doing his house hold choirs with the promise of buying me a batman suit. The other day I saw him and yelled, ‘where’s my fucking batman suit? The movie is three days away!’

                You know, I ought to sue his ass for that thing.

              2. i gotta mostly agree. bullies are made early and bullies suck.

                god knows i deal with the victims of bullies and the bullies themselves a lot, and when you have that kind of lack of empathy and fuckupedness (excuse the highfaluting grad school psych terminology), it is in your very essence and seeps through your pores.

                empathy is an essential human quality, and bullies are sorely lacking in it

                1. The late Rodney King would agree.

                  1. when he wasn’t out eluding police in high speed chases, resisting arrest under the influence of PCP etc. you mean

                    1. Seriously dunphy?

                      And no, Randian, I’m not obligated to do anything.

                    2. Seriously dunphy?

                      What’s the problem? You’re the one who got in bed with him; don’t complain about how he looks in the morning.

  11. Instead it seems to have made him especially wary of de-escalating the war on drugs, despite promises to do so, lest he supply further ammunition to puerile prohibitionists like Sununu and Limbaugh.

    This is really fucking stupid, are you high Jake?

    All Republicans’ Fault! Obama would have done everything he promised if not for those meddling Republicans.

    1. Yeah, that’s nuts. If he wanted to do it, he would have.

    2. No kidding. If BO had refrained from raiding med MJ dispensaries in CA and CO etc, I seriously don’t think you’d hear a peep out of either of them. Demonizing cancer patients isn’t a winning political issue, even for drug warriors.

      Characterizing his policy (let alone his attitude) as “wary” is excuse-manufacturing to the nth degree, particularly when you’re calling a fellow drug warrior of Obama’s “puerile” in the same sentence.

      1. His biggest failure, no doubt.

        1. what a colossally retarded argument, the “obama WOULD be dismantling the WOD if it wasn’t for those meddling republicans”

          seriously.

          that’s utter stupid

          1. Jan 20, 2013: BO is revealed to be Mr. Gowers in disguise, trying to scare people away from the pot dispensaries so he could buy them cheap.

            1. fwiw, if it wasn’t for those meddling (log cabin) republicans, we’d likely still have DADT

      2. Yes, I do have to say that this paragraph is more than a little absurd.

    3. Instead it seems to have made him especially wary of de-escalating the war on drugs,

      Were you really expecting anything from a guy that picked Biden for VP? All I can say, Jacob, Obama raped you between your ears if you did.

      1. the effects of that assault are evident in this piece. When you look up the term “make news”, this is what it looks like.

  12. Talk about missing the point. While factually accurate Sununu failed to drive the nail home with an appopriate conclusion:

    Romney is a businessman (for whatever it has been worth); Obama, for the nearly the whole of his adult life, as been a tax-fed leech.

    1. This is the rebuttal that I wonder if it would work for Romney: “Tax dodger? On those two years of tax returns, I paid more in taxes than you’ve paid your entire life.”

  13. …and growing this economy, you were at Columbia smoking weed and snorting coke.

    While I don’t doubt Sununu or Limbaugh will lead cheer for the drug war whenever it suits their purpose (and they may even be earnest crusaders), I think the use here is to suggest slackerism, or hippie mentality. Someone not engaged in industry but instead producing nothing. Pretty standard lazy fair for a presidential election year.

    In other news, I didn’t think the Bain-slash-offshore garbage was going to play much outside Commie circles, but I was talking to a fence-sitter today who really took that shit seriously. Of all the crap to hate Romney for, that was what she picked.

    1. “Fair”? Are you in Hawaii smoking something?

      1. Cut me some slack. I was hurrying through being on topic in my march to relaying a personal anecdote.

        1. “The Bain Death March”

            1. As usual, Limbaugh is being misinterpreted. If the fucking AV Club can recognize what Limbaugh was really saying, then anyone with two brain cells ought to be able to as well.

              1. Taking the more involved quote from the article you referenced:

                Have you heard this new movie, the Batman movie, what is it, The Dark Knight Lights Up or whatever the name is. That’s right, Dark Knight Rises, Lights Up, same thing. Do you know the name of the villain in this movie? Bane. The villain in The Dark Knight Rises is named Bane, B-a-n-e. What is the name of the venture capital firm that Romney ran and around which there’s now this make-believe controversy? Bain. The movie has been in the works for a long time. The release date’s been known, summer 2012 for a long time. Do you think that it is accidental that the name of the really vicious fire-breathing four-eyed whatever-it-is villain in this movie is named Bain?

                That makes it better? For fucks sake… Cracked is already saying that the Dark Knight is a reference to George W. Bush.

                Could the villain choice of Bane have something to do with him being one of the most iconic villains that could work in a movie?

                1. Nephilium, you are still wrong. Go read the entire transcript at rushlimbaugh.com or read the AV article I posted.

            2. This is Jezebel level stupid.

              1. Fluffy, seriously, new rule: if you think Rush is saying something stupid, you are wrong. He may be saying something evil; he may be saying something partisan; he may be saying something malicious, but he is never, ever saying the stupid things people claim he is saying.

                1. Have you heard a homeless update lately?

                  1. There was an SUV update the other day with the In the Ghettoparody song “Buy a Yugo”.

    2. Envy reaches far and wide.

      1. Karl Marx didn’t understand much about human behavior, but that’s the one thing he got right.

      2. That’s just it, I don’t think it was envy. It sounded more as if she didn’t like it because she was told she shouldn’t like it. It was as easy as that.

        Of course, the thing she picked out to not like about Obama was his stance on gay marriage, so go figure. The independent voter that Welch and Gillespie are touting as saviors of the Republic.

        1. Oh, one of those. Well, she’ll probably be just as easily swayed later when the ads really start hitting the airwaves. She’ll probably waffle back and forth until the election, and act as a sort of random vote generator when the time finally comes.

          1. Always nice to know my well-informed, carefully considered vote is up against at least 30 of those.

    3. Yeah but as Fluffy pointed out above, Romney was wasting those years evangelizing in France. I don’t see how that is any more productive than sitting around smoking pot.

      1. Of course it’s not. About on par with “Community Organizer,” though.

      2. The first productive thing BO does in his life will be to lose this election.

      3. I actually looked it up. I usually think of missionaries as a force for good’ working very hard helping people improve their lives in a very real way just for the opportunity of offering the voluntary choice to save their souls.

        Looks like all Romney did was to try and persuade Frogs to put down the wine and get right with Moroni.

        1. Which seeing as how great living in France is (no, really, it is), that seems actively harmful. And why would Europeans have any interest in “Jesus Part II: American Bugaloo” anyway?

          1. Successfully onverting fun-loving Frogs to such a killjoy religion likely improves one’s sales skills.

            1. Man, talk about futility.

              Hello, French people! I’ll ask you to pour out that wine, stub out those cigarettes, and please refrain from the espresso. Now, who wants marshmallows! Yay!

        2. Yes, this is why I used the word evangelizing instead of missionary work and I should have when responding to Fluffy above. Missionary work could mean building homes for poor people but Romney’s wasn’t.

  14. Well, Jacob, even though you too, misquoted Obama, at least you hyperlinked to an accurate version of the quote.

    “If you’ve got a business” was a subordinate, explanatory clause, and “you didn’t build that” refers to “this unbelievable American system” and “roads and bridges.”

    Of course, to the partisan, accurately rendering the quote is subordinate to getting at the “larger truth.” If misquoting what Obama said serves the purpose of exposing what you “know” that Obama “really” thinks, the subterfuge is justified. Alas, human nature is as pitiable as it is immutable.

    1. HA HA HAH HA HA HA HAH HA HA!!!

      No.

  15. Jonah Goldberg is right. What “fills the seats” in libertarian dealings is the drugs thing.

    The real point from Sununu and Limbaugh is while Maobama was goofing off puffing up, Romney was actually being productive. Yes, we all know productive people who toke, but seriously do you think Maobama is in that set? It is only after the election that we know that his entire pre-president life was being a public leech. Don’t we all know a person or two who stays terminally stoned, gets by, and whines about how unfair the world is to them? If you are not identifying one, just watch “Two and a half Men” and see of you recognize anybody in your life like the kids.

    1. It’s a useful litmus test even to me as a non-drug user.

      Because I can always know that anybody who is a drug warrior is not serious about liberty or small government.

      And when drug warriors engage in drug war rhetoric, it’s always really easy to parse that rhetoric to expose its collectivist underpinnings, its intellectual dishonesty, and its parochial and puritanical Know-Nothingism.

      It also fills the seats because it’s easy to agree on. Land ownership, now THAT’S hard, as anyone who listens to me and John go back and forth will see. But pot? That is so mind-numbingly easy and obvious both from a libertarian perspective and a constitutionalist perspective that there’s really nothing to debate, and nothing else to do but hate.

      1. stunningly well put ^^^

        if you think it’s the JOB of govt. to actually imprison people based on what they choose to put in their bloodstream, ESPECIALLY when we are talking something as (relatively) benign as MJ, you fail the litmus test.

      2. Yes, great post Fluffy.

  16. Needs more Sam Kinison

    Professor Terguson: I was up to my knees in rice paddies, with guns that didn’t work! Going in there, looking for Charlie, slugging it out with him; While
    [shouts]
    Professor Terguson: pussies like you were back here partying, putting headbands on, doing drugs, and
    [shouts]
    Professor Terguson: listening to the goddamn Beatle albums! Oh! Oh! Oh!

  17. speaking of smoking pot in hawaii. pot in hawaii is INSANELY expensive, primarily due to green harvest and other enforcement efforts.

    on a bang for the buck basis, stuff like meth is actually much cheaper

    talk about a perverse result of the war on mj, is that people can better afford a shit-tastic dangerous drug like meth, than a relatively benign drug like mj

    in fucking hawaii for fuck’s sake.

    i mean it’s known for it’s pakalolo

    1. Rush should stick to Viagra/Oxy fueled DR boy-banging vacations.

      1. Do you have any evidence that Rush Limbaugh is a pedophile? Because that’s a pretty shitty thing to accuse someone of without proof. How would you like it if someone did that to you?

        1. it’s PB, an Obama guy. Seems shitty accusations are part of the club.

          1. this meme has been all the rage on far left blogs for a while. apparentrly, rush was caught with a bunch of viagra or something like that, on a return trip from the dominican republic, so the obvious inference was he was using it to schtup young boys or some such hogwash.

            it kind of reminds me of the lefties claim about bush being a cokehead based on the flimsiest of evidence.

            and typical of the leftie penchant to attack the person, not the ideas.

            1. I agree that it’s a cheap shot to claim that Rush was there for little boys without some kind of evidence, but if you travel to the DR unaccompanied with a bag full of Viagra, there’s no way you’re not on a sexcation.

              Unless he was meeting a secret lover there, the odds are pretty good he was there to bang cheap Third World hookers. And hey, if that’s your thing, knock yourself out, I guess. I’m pro-sex-worker-liberty, even if I’m too fastidious personally to even stand within 100 feet of a hooker. (Shivers)

              1. that he was on a sexcation (whether to meet a longterm lover or use hookers etc. or whatever) is at least a rational inference

                the leap to – he was schtupping young boys is where the bigotry and disconnect enters

              2. Dominican hookers do not equal little boys. But it’s PB; sometimes, you just ignore stupidity.

      2. Boy banging? Sounds like you figured out how Maobamaboy afforded all of that expensive pot.

        1. And here’s shrike’s equally shitty counterpart making an equally shitty accusation.

          John T., will you never tire of play-acting a retarded “fantasy” girl?

          1. One day it will bring life to his Realdoll! You just have to believe!

            1. john t. is what most people think actual libertarians are like.

            2. Hasn’t it? Is Suki not real to other people by now?

              I mean, what are you all smoking?

          2. I’m glad we have you out there policing the civility of discourse, Randian.

            1. I knew you would say something like this. When I call you a ‘retard’, is that the same thing as accusing you of being a pedophile?

              Please go ahead and say that it is so we can all see, yet again, how completely ridiculous you are.

          3. Missing the morning links most days, I’m not up on everything going on. Is that Longtorso? Whatever else can be said, he has a fantastic webpage up on the ’08 collapse.

    2. Hawaiian weed was that expensive in the ancient times when Maobama lived there? Does not sound like a very austere upbringing from his bigoted bank VP grandmother.

      1. pretty sure he lived there prior to green harvest excesses.

        when i was there, weed was incredibly expensive.

        something that should be (in hawaii) a widely available commodity, was a serious luxury item.

        a lot of the PI’s preferred kava kava anyway, which is cheap as hell

        btw, REAL kava kava (ground up root, not that health store bull) is a POWERFUL drug.

        it will knock you on yer arse.

        1. btw, REAL kava kava (ground up root, not that health store bull) is a POWERFUL drug.

          It’s really not. 30 percent kavalactones is about the strongest you can get reliably (and I’ve never seen that outside of internet stores), and even a handful of them doesn’t to a whole lot. Lest you think this is just my body chemistry, I have friends with the same experience.

          So I ask again, have you ever actually tried it?

  18. an experience so common in Obama’s generation (and mine) that never smoking pot marks one as deviant.

    A list of things I have smoked in my 23.98 years:

    4 cigars

    1. so, deviant it is.

      1. Hahaha. $3 ones. My roommate and I considered getting some Cubans when we were in Cozumel, but the guy wouldn’t go below $20 for anything so we passed.

  19. I should praise the MST3K reference (I think) in the title. I wouldn’t dopple into a pot smoker though.

    1. If there was an MST3K reference, surely I would be able to spot it. I think we have a regular poster whose name is an MST3K reference though.

  20. question: do mormons view alcohol etc. as IMMORAL or are their viewpoints similar to jews and kosher.

    iow, the latter don’t believe that violating kosher is immoral in general. they think keeping kosher is a duty for MOTT. a christian eating pork is not a “bad” thing in their eyes

    whereas some others in some religions think X is, for example, wrong whether or not one is a MOTT

    from a game theory basis, alcoholism is exceptionally costly (lost jobs, lives, wages, families etc.) and even though a relatively small %age of those who try and use alcohol BECOME abusers, zero percentage of those who never try alcohol become alcohol abusers.

    so, in that respect, it’s actually a good strategy (eschewing alcohol) in that ceteris paribus, your group will have fewer social pathologies (assuming substitute fuckupedness doesn’t take the place of alcohol) than a group that think alcohol is ok

    i’ve never heard a mormon say that alcohol etc. is “evil” etc. just that THEY are prohibited from drinking it, so i think it may be analogous to the jewish/kosher thang, but honestly i really have no idea

    1. Utah’s liquor laws indicate it’s not a kosher thing.

      1. i have no idea what their liquor laws are, but if they are prohibitive, that’s probably a good point.

        i am pretty sure that in a community run by orthodox jews, they would not be passing laws against pork sale.

        i can say anecdotally, i’ve never gotten so much as an askance look (that I noticed) from my mormon friends when i am quaffing beer. i was at a party saturday and was doing so, around a bunch of mormons

        maybe when they get home, they talk about how “fallen” i am for drinking beer.

        this is of course shitpoor evidence, they may just be polite.

        1. When I lived there Utah’s liquor laws were slightly more prohibitive than the Canadian provinces I’ve lived in.

          You could buy a cocktail in a bar or licensed restaurant in Ontario whereas you could not in Utah. OTOH, you could buy beer in grocery stores in UT. Both places required that you go to a state run store to buy wine and spirits.

          In the forty years since both places have relaxed some rules, tightened others.

          Abstaining from alcohol, tobacco and caffeine is a health law for Mormons. They consider them harmful and their use a affront to God. The “revelation” in which the prohibition is ordered also counsels moderation in many other things, suggesting for example the consumption of red meat only three (IIRC) times a week.

    2. AFAIK, it’s evil.

      Coffee and Coca-cola are evil, too.

      1. I could never be a Mormon. Shiksa maybe, Mormon no way.

        1. you could be a jack mormon. eat lots of jello, but you can have coffee and beer

        2. you aren’t a woman, John T., no matter how desperately you persist in this fantasy.

          1. That sure is an odd obsession you have there. Like a lust for Epi approval.

      2. spanx for the info. good to know

  21. Mark Hamill has never seen such devotion in a droid before.

    “And if you don’t vote for Barack Obama, you’re insane,” said Hamill, who gave his voice to the Joker in the recent smash-hit video game “Batman: Arkham City.”

    “‘Cause without him, I think the middle class will completely disappear. And you look at Romney?and I’m sure he’s a nice guy, but I think he’s like The Thing: He only imitates human behavior. He’s not actually human himself. “

    1. I have a problem with exactly one word in his comments.

      And if you don’t vote for Barack Obama, you’re insane

      One word out, and it makes total sense. He is almost there.

      1. He needs Randian to work PR for him; he could make a case for it being a typo.

        Not a good case, but a persistent one.

        1. I dunno…Randian might require that people think rationally, something Hamill appears incapable of doing.

        2. It criez moar harder, Tulpa.

    2. Well, okay, you would have to remove the, Cause without him, I think the middle class will completely disappear. But it is still promising!

  22. fwiw, mormons (besides maybe some really nerdy accountants) are the only people i know who can wear a tie and a short-sleeve shirt with no sense of irony.

    i’m no fashionista, but i just can’t STAND the short sleeve shirt with tie look (again, if it’s skinny tie worn by a hipster or something it’s tolerable, but it is not SERIOUS “dress wear”)

    unless you are cholo’ing out, or a weezer’esque ironic nerd, you never button the top button of a short sleeve shirt and god forbid put a tie on it

    1. Homer Simpson can also pull it off at work.

      1. “But Sipowitz does it!”

  23. I don’t think smoking weed is a disqualification, but it isn’t exactly a recommendation, either.

    1. i would argue it’s neutral. iow, 100% irrelevant

      show me candidate X and show me the exact same candidate, except he smoked pot sometimes in college or whatever

      is there any rational difference to think one candidate “better” than the other?

      not imo

      if anything, i’d LEAN towards the smoker because maybe they’d be more open to legalization/decrim although god knows it hasn’t been the case with clinton or obama so mebbe not

      fwiw, i work with a fair # of cops who smoked mj on occasion back in college, etc.

      our background investigators don’t consider it disqualifying

      1. “i would argue it’s neutral. iow, 100% irrelevant”

        I think that’s what I just said, basically.

  24. On a torrid August day, in 1984, at about noon, not long after I had returned home from my summer studies at the John Hopkins School for Advanced International Studies (can you believe that I actually shared an elevator with former defense secretary Harold Brown, on more than one occaison?), the doorbell rang just as I was leaving the house for my bouncer / valet parking job.

    Two young men, about my age (21), both haberdashered in white oxford shirts and dark navy trousers, sweating profusely, greeted me.

    One of them said, “hello, we are from the Jesus Christ Church of Latter Day Saints and we would like to talk to you.”

    I responded that I would love to chat but I was late for work.

    However, I invited them in and told them, “my parents and my aunt and uncle are in the kitchen and they would love to talk with you. Besides, my father just started the grill and my aunt made some lemonade.”

    I have always loved bringing people together. Maybe those young men thought what they were doing was productive; my folks did not think what I did was.

    Well, fluffy did call me a douche the other day.

    1. I fucked with some Jehovah Witnesses one day last Spring. I was strolling up the street where the side walk is paved and caught sight of them in a town car with dark windows. They seemed lost. Their car pulled up close and I eagerly caught up to them and asked before they could say anything.

      “Is Prince in there?”

      I acted like I was trying to peer into the back seat.

      “Prince?”

      “Yeah, I heard he goes door to door for the Witness. I heard he might be in town.”

      “He’s not riding with us.”

      Lady in the back hooted a chuckle.

      “If you ever get him riding with you, be sure to come by, okay?”

      They politely told made their adieu but couldn’t quell the laughing.

      1. Huh?

        1. Have you ever noticed Mila Kunis’ eyes look like paisleys?

          http://www2.pictures.stylebist…..lXK6ol.jpg

          1. I have no idea what’s going on, man.

        2. Prince is a Jehovah’s Witness, Auric.

      2. You are talking my language, K.

        1. I figured you would like that one.

  25. Dude is not making a lot of sense man, WOw.

    http://www.Privacy-Back.tk

  26. So Sullum is humorless when someone menaces one of his sacred cows. Who knew?

  27. Make money using Google. Find out how to make up to $175/hr working for this billion dollar company. More info @ makecash25dotcomONLY

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.