Sheriffs sue Colorado over legal marijuana

Mindmelted

Mindmelted

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
There are a lot of us RIU members in Colorado. I've met dozens already through get together and smoke outs.

Ain't legalization GRAND?!
Click to expand...
Yes it is.
Never thought i would see it in my life.
Would love to have a smoke out.
Any good oils around in colorado?
 
Red1966

Red1966

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
What's really fucked up is how great a leader her sister Susan Rice would be- which is likely why the repubs went so totally batshit crazy during her confirmation hearing that she withdrew for the good of the administration.

A class act by a class act, that was. Since then she's done an incredible amount of great work, unsung, behind the scenes and for the most part out of the spotlight.

When great people can't get confirmed for the posts that desperately need them, it's time to seriously reexamine what's wrong with this country.
Click to expand...
"Great work" lying to the public on behalf of the Obama admin is hardly a "class act". When lying bastards get confirmed for the posts that desperately don't need them, it's time to seriously reexamine what's wrong with this country.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
londonfog said:
really ? Ron Paul was not really for the Civil rights movement. Picture him as President with the power of the veto. again do you process what you type. Honest question. Sometimes we say things before we think them thru.
Click to expand...
The way you have presented that creates a false impression. You imply if a person opposed the federal government changing the meaning of private property to pseudo public property like they did with civil rights that means they are a racist.

A person can be opposed to the civil rights laws and their reason may not be based in racism, it might be based in respect for others rights to control their property.

I realize the concept of property rights sometimes evades you though....hey where did my orange go?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
what part of re-legalizing exclusion based solely on race is not based in racism?
Click to expand...


A person could be opposed to holding a racist point of view themself and STILL recognize the right of a racist to control his OWN property, or at least some of us that aren't as big on running others lives for them can. That's not an endorsement of racism, it is a REJECTION of using force to dictate how others will use their own property.

I notice you haven't addressed the point I made above, why not?
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
A person could be opposed to holding a racist point of view themself and STILL recognize the right of a racist to control his OWN property, or at least some of us that aren't as big on running others lives for them can. That's not an endorsement of racism, it is a REJECTION of using force to dictate how others will use their own property.

I notice you haven't addressed the point I made above, why not?
Click to expand...
so a racist can't say 'private club' already and satisfy their racism as is?

oh, they already can.

so why is it so important to you that everyone be able to exclude others on the sole basis of race? what part of that is not based 100% in racism, since everyone already has the ability to control their property?

you are a pathetic racist weasel fuck.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
so a racist can't say 'private club' already and satisfy their racism as is?

oh, they already can.

so why is it so important to you that everyone be able to exclude others on the sole basis of race? what part of that is not based 100% in racism, since everyone already has the ability to control their property?

you are a pathetic racist weasel fuck.
Click to expand...

Prior to the so called civil rights act, all private property already was a "private club".

While it may be important to me that people be able to do or not do a particular thing that may or may not please me on their own land that's not the point. I don't own their land, so what matters on their own land and using their own body is what is important to THEM, not you or me. It goes the same way on your land and with your body.



The rest of your post was your usual string of unsubstantiated insults. It almost seems like by doing that and not addressing the things I post, you have no ability to refute it. I think that means I'm winning.
 
UncleBuck

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Prior to the so called civil rights act, all private property already was a "private club".
Click to expand...
and racists like you caused a lot of harm when it was like that. you do not have a right to cause harm. hence why a law was put in place to keep you from causing harm.

and you racists can still control your own property. you just can't kick out black people while calling yourself open to the public anymore.

you've never told me what the most peaceful, non-aggressive way to kick black people out of your store is.
 
londonfog

londonfog

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck said:
and racists like you caused a lot of harm when it was like that. you do not have a right to cause harm. hence why a law was put in place to keep you from causing harm.

and you racists can still control your own property. you just can't kick out black people while calling yourself open to the public anymore.

you've never told me what the most peaceful, non-aggressive way to kick black people out of your store is.
Click to expand...
He can never answer the way to peacefully, non-aggressively kick black people out of a store. I'm curious as to why ? but not really
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top