The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
#171
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote in message news:<timberwoof-83A8AE.00011118042004@typhoon.sonic.net>...
> In article <ba696799.0404172100.55514e55@posting.google.com >,
> keithj43@yahoo.com (keith) wrote:
>
> > It's ridiculous to suggest that Kerry would raise taxes except to roll
> > back the tax cuts Bush targeted toward his wealthy supporters. On the
> > other hand, Bush has increased the deficit to historic highs; he has
> > taken the unprecedented step of cutting taxes during war-time, when we
> > need *more* money, not less.
>
> Look, it's all dribble-down economics. If you reduce the tax burden on
> the rich, then they will be encouraged to make and keep more money for
> themselves. After all, if they create more jobs, then that would mean
> that their employees would have to pay more taxes, and that would be
> evil. So what ends up happening is that through unemployment everyone
> ends up paying fewer taxes.
LOL :-)
Keith
> In article <ba696799.0404172100.55514e55@posting.google.com >,
> keithj43@yahoo.com (keith) wrote:
>
> > It's ridiculous to suggest that Kerry would raise taxes except to roll
> > back the tax cuts Bush targeted toward his wealthy supporters. On the
> > other hand, Bush has increased the deficit to historic highs; he has
> > taken the unprecedented step of cutting taxes during war-time, when we
> > need *more* money, not less.
>
> Look, it's all dribble-down economics. If you reduce the tax burden on
> the rich, then they will be encouraged to make and keep more money for
> themselves. After all, if they create more jobs, then that would mean
> that their employees would have to pay more taxes, and that would be
> evil. So what ends up happening is that through unemployment everyone
> ends up paying fewer taxes.
LOL :-)
Keith
#172
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote in message news:<timberwoof-83A8AE.00011118042004@typhoon.sonic.net>...
> In article <ba696799.0404172100.55514e55@posting.google.com >,
> keithj43@yahoo.com (keith) wrote:
>
> > It's ridiculous to suggest that Kerry would raise taxes except to roll
> > back the tax cuts Bush targeted toward his wealthy supporters. On the
> > other hand, Bush has increased the deficit to historic highs; he has
> > taken the unprecedented step of cutting taxes during war-time, when we
> > need *more* money, not less.
>
> Look, it's all dribble-down economics. If you reduce the tax burden on
> the rich, then they will be encouraged to make and keep more money for
> themselves. After all, if they create more jobs, then that would mean
> that their employees would have to pay more taxes, and that would be
> evil. So what ends up happening is that through unemployment everyone
> ends up paying fewer taxes.
LOL :-)
Keith
> In article <ba696799.0404172100.55514e55@posting.google.com >,
> keithj43@yahoo.com (keith) wrote:
>
> > It's ridiculous to suggest that Kerry would raise taxes except to roll
> > back the tax cuts Bush targeted toward his wealthy supporters. On the
> > other hand, Bush has increased the deficit to historic highs; he has
> > taken the unprecedented step of cutting taxes during war-time, when we
> > need *more* money, not less.
>
> Look, it's all dribble-down economics. If you reduce the tax burden on
> the rich, then they will be encouraged to make and keep more money for
> themselves. After all, if they create more jobs, then that would mean
> that their employees would have to pay more taxes, and that would be
> evil. So what ends up happening is that through unemployment everyone
> ends up paying fewer taxes.
LOL :-)
Keith
#173
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote in message news:<timberwoof-83A8AE.00011118042004@typhoon.sonic.net>...
> In article <ba696799.0404172100.55514e55@posting.google.com >,
> keithj43@yahoo.com (keith) wrote:
>
> > It's ridiculous to suggest that Kerry would raise taxes except to roll
> > back the tax cuts Bush targeted toward his wealthy supporters. On the
> > other hand, Bush has increased the deficit to historic highs; he has
> > taken the unprecedented step of cutting taxes during war-time, when we
> > need *more* money, not less.
>
> Look, it's all dribble-down economics. If you reduce the tax burden on
> the rich, then they will be encouraged to make and keep more money for
> themselves. After all, if they create more jobs, then that would mean
> that their employees would have to pay more taxes, and that would be
> evil. So what ends up happening is that through unemployment everyone
> ends up paying fewer taxes.
LOL :-)
Keith
> In article <ba696799.0404172100.55514e55@posting.google.com >,
> keithj43@yahoo.com (keith) wrote:
>
> > It's ridiculous to suggest that Kerry would raise taxes except to roll
> > back the tax cuts Bush targeted toward his wealthy supporters. On the
> > other hand, Bush has increased the deficit to historic highs; he has
> > taken the unprecedented step of cutting taxes during war-time, when we
> > need *more* money, not less.
>
> Look, it's all dribble-down economics. If you reduce the tax burden on
> the rich, then they will be encouraged to make and keep more money for
> themselves. After all, if they create more jobs, then that would mean
> that their employees would have to pay more taxes, and that would be
> evil. So what ends up happening is that through unemployment everyone
> ends up paying fewer taxes.
LOL :-)
Keith
#174
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
In article <_oOdnds-IpdqGh_dRVn-ug@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
> Yes, taxes should be raised on the wealthy. Maybe they should
> consider legalizing pot as well and taxing the hell out of it. If
> they would legalize pot, tax it, I bet you see a HUGE part of the
> deficit reduced.
If pot is legalized, regulated, and taxed, then it will be the big drug
and tobacco companies that will run the show. It will be illegal to grow
and make your own, and the same sorts of bogus reasons that are given
for shutting down private nanobreweries will be used to shut down
private growers. (The most oft cited reason for shutting down
nanobreweries is that they might make woof alcohol [methanol] instead of
grain alcohol [ethanol]. The real reason is that brewing is taxed and is
the exclusive domain of money-making companies.) Also, the tax money
from legalized pot will not be used to fund free, no-questions-asked
drug rehab programs, but more corporate pork such as vastly stiffer law
enforcement and prisons for users of harder drugs. People who buy
"legal" pot on their credit cards will be tracked.
> I agree that tax cuts were necessary at the time BEFORE 9/11. After
> 9/11 though, the President should have braced the country and told
> everyone that due to this war, and the cost involved, no more tax
> cuts. I didn't agree with his second round of tax cuts.
It was necessary to maintain the tax rate at the same level as before
and, during those fat times, save that extra budget money. In the
following lean times, it might have been possible to save certain
worthwhile programs. Of course, George II thinks it's perfectly fair to
cut federal support for child care and give people a couple of hundred
bucks to pay for it with.
> Legalize pot, tax it. We already have one drug that is legal, and it
> is involved in more than 75% of all domestic crimes. People realized
> at one time, making it illegal didn't work. Legalize it, tax the
> hell out of it.
Just one drug? I can name four off the top of my head: alcohol,
nicotine, caffeine, and chocolate.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
> Yes, taxes should be raised on the wealthy. Maybe they should
> consider legalizing pot as well and taxing the hell out of it. If
> they would legalize pot, tax it, I bet you see a HUGE part of the
> deficit reduced.
If pot is legalized, regulated, and taxed, then it will be the big drug
and tobacco companies that will run the show. It will be illegal to grow
and make your own, and the same sorts of bogus reasons that are given
for shutting down private nanobreweries will be used to shut down
private growers. (The most oft cited reason for shutting down
nanobreweries is that they might make woof alcohol [methanol] instead of
grain alcohol [ethanol]. The real reason is that brewing is taxed and is
the exclusive domain of money-making companies.) Also, the tax money
from legalized pot will not be used to fund free, no-questions-asked
drug rehab programs, but more corporate pork such as vastly stiffer law
enforcement and prisons for users of harder drugs. People who buy
"legal" pot on their credit cards will be tracked.
> I agree that tax cuts were necessary at the time BEFORE 9/11. After
> 9/11 though, the President should have braced the country and told
> everyone that due to this war, and the cost involved, no more tax
> cuts. I didn't agree with his second round of tax cuts.
It was necessary to maintain the tax rate at the same level as before
and, during those fat times, save that extra budget money. In the
following lean times, it might have been possible to save certain
worthwhile programs. Of course, George II thinks it's perfectly fair to
cut federal support for child care and give people a couple of hundred
bucks to pay for it with.
> Legalize pot, tax it. We already have one drug that is legal, and it
> is involved in more than 75% of all domestic crimes. People realized
> at one time, making it illegal didn't work. Legalize it, tax the
> hell out of it.
Just one drug? I can name four off the top of my head: alcohol,
nicotine, caffeine, and chocolate.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
#175
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
In article <_oOdnds-IpdqGh_dRVn-ug@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
> Yes, taxes should be raised on the wealthy. Maybe they should
> consider legalizing pot as well and taxing the hell out of it. If
> they would legalize pot, tax it, I bet you see a HUGE part of the
> deficit reduced.
If pot is legalized, regulated, and taxed, then it will be the big drug
and tobacco companies that will run the show. It will be illegal to grow
and make your own, and the same sorts of bogus reasons that are given
for shutting down private nanobreweries will be used to shut down
private growers. (The most oft cited reason for shutting down
nanobreweries is that they might make woof alcohol [methanol] instead of
grain alcohol [ethanol]. The real reason is that brewing is taxed and is
the exclusive domain of money-making companies.) Also, the tax money
from legalized pot will not be used to fund free, no-questions-asked
drug rehab programs, but more corporate pork such as vastly stiffer law
enforcement and prisons for users of harder drugs. People who buy
"legal" pot on their credit cards will be tracked.
> I agree that tax cuts were necessary at the time BEFORE 9/11. After
> 9/11 though, the President should have braced the country and told
> everyone that due to this war, and the cost involved, no more tax
> cuts. I didn't agree with his second round of tax cuts.
It was necessary to maintain the tax rate at the same level as before
and, during those fat times, save that extra budget money. In the
following lean times, it might have been possible to save certain
worthwhile programs. Of course, George II thinks it's perfectly fair to
cut federal support for child care and give people a couple of hundred
bucks to pay for it with.
> Legalize pot, tax it. We already have one drug that is legal, and it
> is involved in more than 75% of all domestic crimes. People realized
> at one time, making it illegal didn't work. Legalize it, tax the
> hell out of it.
Just one drug? I can name four off the top of my head: alcohol,
nicotine, caffeine, and chocolate.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
> Yes, taxes should be raised on the wealthy. Maybe they should
> consider legalizing pot as well and taxing the hell out of it. If
> they would legalize pot, tax it, I bet you see a HUGE part of the
> deficit reduced.
If pot is legalized, regulated, and taxed, then it will be the big drug
and tobacco companies that will run the show. It will be illegal to grow
and make your own, and the same sorts of bogus reasons that are given
for shutting down private nanobreweries will be used to shut down
private growers. (The most oft cited reason for shutting down
nanobreweries is that they might make woof alcohol [methanol] instead of
grain alcohol [ethanol]. The real reason is that brewing is taxed and is
the exclusive domain of money-making companies.) Also, the tax money
from legalized pot will not be used to fund free, no-questions-asked
drug rehab programs, but more corporate pork such as vastly stiffer law
enforcement and prisons for users of harder drugs. People who buy
"legal" pot on their credit cards will be tracked.
> I agree that tax cuts were necessary at the time BEFORE 9/11. After
> 9/11 though, the President should have braced the country and told
> everyone that due to this war, and the cost involved, no more tax
> cuts. I didn't agree with his second round of tax cuts.
It was necessary to maintain the tax rate at the same level as before
and, during those fat times, save that extra budget money. In the
following lean times, it might have been possible to save certain
worthwhile programs. Of course, George II thinks it's perfectly fair to
cut federal support for child care and give people a couple of hundred
bucks to pay for it with.
> Legalize pot, tax it. We already have one drug that is legal, and it
> is involved in more than 75% of all domestic crimes. People realized
> at one time, making it illegal didn't work. Legalize it, tax the
> hell out of it.
Just one drug? I can name four off the top of my head: alcohol,
nicotine, caffeine, and chocolate.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
#176
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
In article <_oOdnds-IpdqGh_dRVn-ug@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
> Yes, taxes should be raised on the wealthy. Maybe they should
> consider legalizing pot as well and taxing the hell out of it. If
> they would legalize pot, tax it, I bet you see a HUGE part of the
> deficit reduced.
If pot is legalized, regulated, and taxed, then it will be the big drug
and tobacco companies that will run the show. It will be illegal to grow
and make your own, and the same sorts of bogus reasons that are given
for shutting down private nanobreweries will be used to shut down
private growers. (The most oft cited reason for shutting down
nanobreweries is that they might make woof alcohol [methanol] instead of
grain alcohol [ethanol]. The real reason is that brewing is taxed and is
the exclusive domain of money-making companies.) Also, the tax money
from legalized pot will not be used to fund free, no-questions-asked
drug rehab programs, but more corporate pork such as vastly stiffer law
enforcement and prisons for users of harder drugs. People who buy
"legal" pot on their credit cards will be tracked.
> I agree that tax cuts were necessary at the time BEFORE 9/11. After
> 9/11 though, the President should have braced the country and told
> everyone that due to this war, and the cost involved, no more tax
> cuts. I didn't agree with his second round of tax cuts.
It was necessary to maintain the tax rate at the same level as before
and, during those fat times, save that extra budget money. In the
following lean times, it might have been possible to save certain
worthwhile programs. Of course, George II thinks it's perfectly fair to
cut federal support for child care and give people a couple of hundred
bucks to pay for it with.
> Legalize pot, tax it. We already have one drug that is legal, and it
> is involved in more than 75% of all domestic crimes. People realized
> at one time, making it illegal didn't work. Legalize it, tax the
> hell out of it.
Just one drug? I can name four off the top of my head: alcohol,
nicotine, caffeine, and chocolate.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
> Yes, taxes should be raised on the wealthy. Maybe they should
> consider legalizing pot as well and taxing the hell out of it. If
> they would legalize pot, tax it, I bet you see a HUGE part of the
> deficit reduced.
If pot is legalized, regulated, and taxed, then it will be the big drug
and tobacco companies that will run the show. It will be illegal to grow
and make your own, and the same sorts of bogus reasons that are given
for shutting down private nanobreweries will be used to shut down
private growers. (The most oft cited reason for shutting down
nanobreweries is that they might make woof alcohol [methanol] instead of
grain alcohol [ethanol]. The real reason is that brewing is taxed and is
the exclusive domain of money-making companies.) Also, the tax money
from legalized pot will not be used to fund free, no-questions-asked
drug rehab programs, but more corporate pork such as vastly stiffer law
enforcement and prisons for users of harder drugs. People who buy
"legal" pot on their credit cards will be tracked.
> I agree that tax cuts were necessary at the time BEFORE 9/11. After
> 9/11 though, the President should have braced the country and told
> everyone that due to this war, and the cost involved, no more tax
> cuts. I didn't agree with his second round of tax cuts.
It was necessary to maintain the tax rate at the same level as before
and, during those fat times, save that extra budget money. In the
following lean times, it might have been possible to save certain
worthwhile programs. Of course, George II thinks it's perfectly fair to
cut federal support for child care and give people a couple of hundred
bucks to pay for it with.
> Legalize pot, tax it. We already have one drug that is legal, and it
> is involved in more than 75% of all domestic crimes. People realized
> at one time, making it illegal didn't work. Legalize it, tax the
> hell out of it.
Just one drug? I can name four off the top of my head: alcohol,
nicotine, caffeine, and chocolate.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
#177
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
In article <_oOdnds-IpdqGh_dRVn-ug@comcast.com>,
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
> Yes, taxes should be raised on the wealthy. Maybe they should
> consider legalizing pot as well and taxing the hell out of it. If
> they would legalize pot, tax it, I bet you see a HUGE part of the
> deficit reduced.
If pot is legalized, regulated, and taxed, then it will be the big drug
and tobacco companies that will run the show. It will be illegal to grow
and make your own, and the same sorts of bogus reasons that are given
for shutting down private nanobreweries will be used to shut down
private growers. (The most oft cited reason for shutting down
nanobreweries is that they might make woof alcohol [methanol] instead of
grain alcohol [ethanol]. The real reason is that brewing is taxed and is
the exclusive domain of money-making companies.) Also, the tax money
from legalized pot will not be used to fund free, no-questions-asked
drug rehab programs, but more corporate pork such as vastly stiffer law
enforcement and prisons for users of harder drugs. People who buy
"legal" pot on their credit cards will be tracked.
> I agree that tax cuts were necessary at the time BEFORE 9/11. After
> 9/11 though, the President should have braced the country and told
> everyone that due to this war, and the cost involved, no more tax
> cuts. I didn't agree with his second round of tax cuts.
It was necessary to maintain the tax rate at the same level as before
and, during those fat times, save that extra budget money. In the
following lean times, it might have been possible to save certain
worthwhile programs. Of course, George II thinks it's perfectly fair to
cut federal support for child care and give people a couple of hundred
bucks to pay for it with.
> Legalize pot, tax it. We already have one drug that is legal, and it
> is involved in more than 75% of all domestic crimes. People realized
> at one time, making it illegal didn't work. Legalize it, tax the
> hell out of it.
Just one drug? I can name four off the top of my head: alcohol,
nicotine, caffeine, and chocolate.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
"Osprey" <noneedtoknow@mail.com> wrote:
> Yes, taxes should be raised on the wealthy. Maybe they should
> consider legalizing pot as well and taxing the hell out of it. If
> they would legalize pot, tax it, I bet you see a HUGE part of the
> deficit reduced.
If pot is legalized, regulated, and taxed, then it will be the big drug
and tobacco companies that will run the show. It will be illegal to grow
and make your own, and the same sorts of bogus reasons that are given
for shutting down private nanobreweries will be used to shut down
private growers. (The most oft cited reason for shutting down
nanobreweries is that they might make woof alcohol [methanol] instead of
grain alcohol [ethanol]. The real reason is that brewing is taxed and is
the exclusive domain of money-making companies.) Also, the tax money
from legalized pot will not be used to fund free, no-questions-asked
drug rehab programs, but more corporate pork such as vastly stiffer law
enforcement and prisons for users of harder drugs. People who buy
"legal" pot on their credit cards will be tracked.
> I agree that tax cuts were necessary at the time BEFORE 9/11. After
> 9/11 though, the President should have braced the country and told
> everyone that due to this war, and the cost involved, no more tax
> cuts. I didn't agree with his second round of tax cuts.
It was necessary to maintain the tax rate at the same level as before
and, during those fat times, save that extra budget money. In the
following lean times, it might have been possible to save certain
worthwhile programs. Of course, George II thinks it's perfectly fair to
cut federal support for child care and give people a couple of hundred
bucks to pay for it with.
> Legalize pot, tax it. We already have one drug that is legal, and it
> is involved in more than 75% of all domestic crimes. People realized
> at one time, making it illegal didn't work. Legalize it, tax the
> hell out of it.
Just one drug? I can name four off the top of my head: alcohol,
nicotine, caffeine, and chocolate.
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
#178
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
In article <F%wgc.31604$B%4.25445@fe2.columbus.rr.com>,
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
> I agree. And not just pot. People have been getting high and searching for
> better ways to do it ever since Ugh the caveman discovered that eating
> fermented fruit would make you fall down and giggle a lot. Be it a bag of
> dried leaves, a vial of white powder or whatever, some people are bound and
> determined to get a buzz and no amount of legislation or disapproval will
> change that. Legalize it all and turn it into a source of revenue instead of
> wasting money and lives trying to stop something that can't be stopped.
But what do you propose to spend that revenue on?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
> I agree. And not just pot. People have been getting high and searching for
> better ways to do it ever since Ugh the caveman discovered that eating
> fermented fruit would make you fall down and giggle a lot. Be it a bag of
> dried leaves, a vial of white powder or whatever, some people are bound and
> determined to get a buzz and no amount of legislation or disapproval will
> change that. Legalize it all and turn it into a source of revenue instead of
> wasting money and lives trying to stop something that can't be stopped.
But what do you propose to spend that revenue on?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
#179
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
In article <F%wgc.31604$B%4.25445@fe2.columbus.rr.com>,
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
> I agree. And not just pot. People have been getting high and searching for
> better ways to do it ever since Ugh the caveman discovered that eating
> fermented fruit would make you fall down and giggle a lot. Be it a bag of
> dried leaves, a vial of white powder or whatever, some people are bound and
> determined to get a buzz and no amount of legislation or disapproval will
> change that. Legalize it all and turn it into a source of revenue instead of
> wasting money and lives trying to stop something that can't be stopped.
But what do you propose to spend that revenue on?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
> I agree. And not just pot. People have been getting high and searching for
> better ways to do it ever since Ugh the caveman discovered that eating
> fermented fruit would make you fall down and giggle a lot. Be it a bag of
> dried leaves, a vial of white powder or whatever, some people are bound and
> determined to get a buzz and no amount of legislation or disapproval will
> change that. Legalize it all and turn it into a source of revenue instead of
> wasting money and lives trying to stop something that can't be stopped.
But what do you propose to spend that revenue on?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
#180
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: The idiocy of those who vote Democrat
In article <F%wgc.31604$B%4.25445@fe2.columbus.rr.com>,
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
> I agree. And not just pot. People have been getting high and searching for
> better ways to do it ever since Ugh the caveman discovered that eating
> fermented fruit would make you fall down and giggle a lot. Be it a bag of
> dried leaves, a vial of white powder or whatever, some people are bound and
> determined to get a buzz and no amount of legislation or disapproval will
> change that. Legalize it all and turn it into a source of revenue instead of
> wasting money and lives trying to stop something that can't be stopped.
But what do you propose to spend that revenue on?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html
"John Baker" <nunya@bizniz.net> wrote:
> I agree. And not just pot. People have been getting high and searching for
> better ways to do it ever since Ugh the caveman discovered that eating
> fermented fruit would make you fall down and giggle a lot. Be it a bag of
> dried leaves, a vial of white powder or whatever, some people are bound and
> determined to get a buzz and no amount of legislation or disapproval will
> change that. Legalize it all and turn it into a source of revenue instead of
> wasting money and lives trying to stop something that can't be stopped.
But what do you propose to spend that revenue on?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com>
http://www.timberwoof.com
Baloney Detection Kit: http://www.xenu.net/archive/baloney_detection.html