US drug war has met none of its goals

[Timshel]

Anybody ever notice that conservatives and far left nuts both fall back to this woo filled definition of natural that is just so much bullshit. Chemicals are good. Without them we die. To be certain, some are very dangerous and nearly all of them can be dangerous in high quantities.

The evil chemicals that make up H2O can kill you (i.e., water toxicity) if you drink too much. But you need it to live. Ditzy and left wing retards think there is some clear distinction between natural and unnatural chemicals and use and abuse. But that is horseshit.

I don't even know how this nonsense applies here, since THC is not altered in a factory. Unless you count the plant as a sort of factory, which it is.

 

[Timshel]

LOL at the guy who believes in majical powers cracking on people using chemicals. Bet Dixtard is the average fat ass pickup driving redneck.

Sipping on some all natural Mountain Dew, chewing on some peanuts that have been chemically altered in an all natural way with salt, heat and water and listening to the all natural sounds of Toothless Bob and the Shitkickers. He's chemical free. Do the of gasses between his ears count? Oh wait a minute... maybe, those are natural. Uhh, yeah God says so.

 

[Damocles]

Yes, cooking your food is "unnatural" however who wants to eat a piece of raw pork?

 

[Timshel]

Yes, cooking your food is "unnatural" however who wants to eat a piece of raw pork?

So, raw pork does not feel good and you don't want to do it. Hedonist.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

and listening to the all natural sounds of Toothless Bob and the Shitkickers. .

Why do you have to make fun of the Old Timey music?

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Explain. Marijuana is just as natural as corn. Is this where you guys use some ridiculous circular logic and label things you don't like as unnatural?

The drug problem in America has nothing to do with what I like and don't like. I am sure I would enjoy the feeling of heroin shooting into my veins as much as the next junkie, but I realize the damage such behavior would have on my system, my body and brain. (not to mention my bank account!)

Ingesting smoke into your lungs (of any kind) is not good for you. Pot makes you 'high' because it causes your brain to release certain chemicals, but those same chemicals contribute to plaque buildup in your arteries. This is why smokers are much more likely to have a stroke... a piece of that plaque breaks off, travels to your brain, and you stroke out.

I personally like Marijuana, and as far as occasional use, I don't see where it is any more damaging than alcohol, or any number of other chemical compounds sold with a prescription. I can't say pot is "good" for you, because it's just not, nothing you smoke is "good" for your respiratory system, and anything you smoke can certainly cause health problems. If locking up people in prison for growing it or smoking it, worked to eliminate people using it, I would favor that... but this doesn't work. That's my point. We are failing to address the REAL problem. We are attempting to tackle a SYMPTOM of a problem, and pretend we are doing something to eliminate the problem when we're not.

I have not made excuses for abusing drugs. I have stated explicitly that it is not good.

Right... and you think your disclaimer is enough to say you've done your part, you've stated this explicitly, so if there is any drug abuse, it's not your fault, right? You can't help what other people do... To each his own... Kay Sara Sara! THAT is why we have an epidemic drug abuse problem in America!

There is something wrong with overeating. There is nothing wrong with eating. Likewise, there is nothing wrong with using substances to improve your condition, but those substances should not be abused.

You claimed there is some sort of clear distinction, but there is not. The line is dependent on the individual. Some people need 1500 calories some need 12000 (Phelps). 12000 calroies, for just about anybody, is way too much, but it works for Phelps.

Food is something we all require to live. Although you've cooked up a really good recipe for strawman on the half-shell! There is not a comparison between artificial stimulants and basic sustenance. However, the fact that you have concocted this wonderful delicacy, shows that you are still in denial, and still trying to justify drug abuse and make it 'okay' if that's what people think 'improves' their condition. It's part and parcel of why we can't even begin to address the real problem, and why we continue to chase a symptom of the problem with futility.

Rush's scenario is a very good example of what I am talking about and so you avoid addressing it. When did he cross the line? I certainly don't know, I don't believe that the line can be drawn clearly and if it can then Rush himself is probably best able to figure out where the line is.

I believe the line between what is medically NEEDED or REQUIRED and what is merely an indulgence, is very clear and defined. I think we should be adult enough to recognize that, and not attempt to blur the distinction further, in an attempt to make something 'okay' or acceptable in society. There is indeed a stark difference between using a substance to treat a legitimate illness or condition, and recreational drug and alcohol use.

What do you think they told Rush in rehab? It's okay if you take Oxycontin for your back pain... there's nothing wrong with you doing something to 'improve your condition' and society shouldn't judge you for that! Is THAT what they told him, or do you suppose he may have undergone some intense counseling, trying to discern what made him seek an 'escape' through abusing the drug? Most rehab programs work because they don't allow the justifications and excuses to stand, they tear those down and seek to bring the individual out of a deep-seated denial of their problem. It doesn't always work, people often revert back to the old habits, and it's not a 'perfect' method, but the concept at least attempts to dig deeper and deal with the REAL problem, not merely chase a symptom.

You are tilting at the wrong windmill. The human desire for pleasure is perfectly natural and good. It produces an enormous amount of good things. But, yes sometimes we go overboard. For instance, [insult redacted]

I'm not tilting at any windmill. The human desire for pleasure is natural, but not always good. It can produce good things, but it can also produce very bad things, very destructive things, and it can cause an enormous amount of displeasure for others. We have to move away from your philosophy and recognize the truth, if we ever hope to make a dent in the drug abuse problem.

Yes, we do sometimes go 'overboard' and that is the problem... WHY do we do that? Isn't it often because the individual is lacking some fulfillment in their life? Could it be because we, as a society, have made their actions acceptable and told them it is 'okay' and 'natural' for them to do this? I think there are a lot of questions we need to ask, instead of continuing to live in denial of the problem, and pretend it's all okay.

 

[Topspin]

pot prohibition is 1,000 times more damaging than pot use ever could be. Dixtard fail

 

[Timshel]

The drug problem in America has nothing to do with what I like and don't like. I am sure I would enjoy the feeling of heroin shooting into my veins as much as the next junkie, but I realize the damage such behavior would have on my system, my body and brain. (not to mention my bank account!)

So you have reasoned that it would not REALLY feel good. Great, me too.

Ingesting smoke into your lungs (of any kind) is not good for you. Pot makes you 'high' because it causes your brain to release certain chemicals, but those same chemicals contribute to plaque buildup in your arteries. This is why smokers are much more likely to have a stroke... a piece of that plaque breaks off, travels to your brain, and you stroke out.

I have seen no study on that. But how is that different than eating beef? Judging from comments below you understand this point.

You don't have to smoke marijuana and as I have noted legalization could only make use of the drug safer as it would greatly reduce monetary costs that influence decision making on how to use.

Right... and you think your disclaimer is enough to say you've done your part, you've stated this explicitly, so if there is any drug abuse, it's not your fault, right? You can't help what other people do... To each his own... Kay Sara Sara! THAT is why we have an epidemic drug abuse problem in America!

Of course, it is not my fault that another person may abuse the product. It's not my fault that some asshole misuses his gun and takes out a dozen school kids either. Or some jerk misuse his car and runs over his wife or something. Why should I accept any guilt?

Food is something we all require to live. Although you've cooked up a really good recipe for strawman on the half-shell! There is not a comparison between artificial stimulants and basic sustenance.

We don't need 12000 calories to survive. Micheal Phelps does not. He eats that much because it helps him to do other things. Rush Limbaugh started taking pain meds for the same reasons, i.e., it helps him to enjoy other parts of his life. At some point he crossed over into abuse, where I don't know. The line is not clear. Michael Phelps might be over the line and his level of food use would be abuse for most people. The line is not clear.

You seem to be arguing that we may only ingest those things absolutely necessary for our survival or that imporve our lives in a way you find acceptable. I don't know why you think you have that right over my body and I know you lack the information to make those decisions for everyone because it depends on the specific details of the individual.

I believe the line between what is medically NEEDED or REQUIRED and what is merely an indulgence, is very clear and defined.

And you are deluding youself.

What do you think they told Rush in rehab? It's okay if you take Oxycontin for your back pain... there's nothing wrong with you doing something to 'improve your condition' and society shouldn't judge you for that! Is THAT what they told him, or do you suppose he may have undergone some intense counseling, trying to discern what made him seek an 'escape' through abusing the drug? Most rehab programs work because they don't allow the justifications and excuses to stand, they tear those down and seek to bring the individual out of a deep-seated denial of their problem. It doesn't always work, people often revert back to the old habits, and it's not a 'perfect' method, but the concept at least attempts to dig deeper and deal with the REAL problem, not merely chase a symptom.

You still fail o answer. With which pill did Rush cross the line.

I am not sure what they told him in rehab and I really don't care since so many of them are based around some woo filled pseudo science.

I don't pass judgement on Rush. From what I have read, he was tring to escape PAIN. You can call that immoral if you want, but fuck you! Rush had every right to try to ease his pain. He developed an addiction and went over board.

I'm not tilting at any windmill. The human desire for pleasure is natural, but not always good. It can produce good things, but it can also produce very bad things, very destructive things, and it can cause an enormous amount of displeasure for others. We have to move away from your philosophy and recognize the truth, if we ever hope to make a dent in the drug abuse problem.

That's the same thing I have been saying. I just don't ascribe the problem to the seeking of pleasure without which we would be miserable and die young, but over indulgence.

Yes, we do sometimes go 'overboard' and that is the problem... WHY do we do that? Isn't it often because the individual is lacking some fulfillment in their life? Could it be because we, as a society, have made their actions acceptable and told them it is 'okay' and 'natural' for them to do this? I think there are a lot of questions we need to ask, instead of continuing to live in denial of the problem, and pretend it's all okay.

SOMETIMES is the key. The people that are using drugs to find some permanent escape are often already suffering severe mental disorders. They probably need to be on some form of medication and closely monitored.

But you tend to imply that everyione that uses is a depraved pleasure seeker or addict. It's not true. As an example, let's use alcohol, since I am guessing you know several people who use that drug. Most use it responsibly. Some get out of hand occasionally and maybe too often. A few can't do it at all.

I am currently off alcohol (knock on wood) because I get out of hand too often. I am more successful in just not drinking than moderating my consumption. But, I am not everyone. As for MJ, I don't have a problem with it. I can smoke a little and be done. I can go without for months and not care much. But I do enjoy it. It's fun. Fun is not a bad thing. You just have to be real with yourself about when something stops being fun. Tell people that fun is always bad and you will have nothing but addicts as they try to cover up the unearned guilt that you place upon them for seeking pleasure.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So you have reasoned that it would not REALLY feel good. Great, me too.

I didn't say that... just the opposite! I am CERTAIN it would "feel good" and I would immensely enjoy the feeling! I personally have no desire to destroy my body and health to "feel good" because I don't have any underlying problems that would cause me to have such a desire. I don't choose not to shoot up heroin because it is illegal, I make my decision based on other factors. The same should hold true to any drug of addiction. We have two sides, one side wants to make all these things illegal and punish suppliers/users, the other side want us to legalize it all and say it's acceptable. I am of the opinion neither idea will work, because they fail to address the problem, and attempt to solve it by addressing a symptom.

I have seen no study on that. But how is that different than eating beef? Judging from comments below you understand this point.

Well there have been all kinds of studies on the effects of smoke in the lungs, I can't cite you any links, but I am sure there are some online... try Google! The fact remains, that is how smoke-able drugs work, and an accurate explanation of the side-effects. I'm sorry... I wish this wasn't the case... I wish that our bodies were able to process these artificially-introduced chemicals without consequences, but no matter how much I wish for that to be the case, it never will be. I have to accept medical science, and it says ingesting smoke into your lungs is harmful.

Yes... Eating beef is also harmful... And whenever I am feeling depressed and want to escape the realities of life, I go to the Sizzler and order me a 20 oz. T-Bone! Consuming that, makes me feel like all my problems are trivial, and I can relieve the stress of the day, or cope with any emotional pain. The thing is, we don't really have a problem with people over-indulging in beef to compensate for low self-esteem or cope with the realities of life and depression. If such an epidemic were happening, it wouldn't do much good to make beef illegal, and it wouldn't help the problem by proclaiming beef 'okay' and 'acceptable' to use in that way. The only way to deal with the problem, is to DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM, not the symptom.

You don't have to smoke marijuana and as I have noted legalization could only make use of the drug safer as it would greatly reduce monetary costs that influence decision making on how to use.

So you think we should make the drug legal, and as long as we include a little pamphlet explaining proper use and responsibility, we've done our part? That way, when people abuse the drug, at least our conscience is clear that we did all we could, right? I mean, we legitimized it and said it was okay, but we included a pamphlet! We can't help it if people don't choose to read it!

What you are doing, is continuing down the road of denial. You are continuing to make justification after justification, for symptoms of a problem to exist, without dealing with the problem itself. Your position is really not much different from that of a person who seeks stricter prohibition laws. Neither viewpoint acknowledges or recognizes the problem itself, only the symptom.

Of course, it is not my fault that another person may abuse the product. It's not my fault that some asshole misuses his gun and takes out a dozen school kids either. Or some jerk misuse his car and runs over his wife or something. Why should I accept any guilt?

Oh, but indeed it IS your fault. If you tell people it's perfectly okay to seek an escape from reality and their problems by using drugs, and that whatever decision they personally make is acceptable to society, then you have condoned such behavior, you have given it legitimacy, and become an 'enabler' for those who will fall into the trap of addiction.

We don't need 12000 calories to survive. Micheal Phelps does not. He eats that much because it helps him to do other things. Rush Limbaugh started taking pain meds for the same reasons, i.e., it helps him to enjoy other parts of his life. At some point he crossed over into abuse, where I don't know. The line is not clear. Michael Phelps might be over the line and his level of food use would be abuse for most people. The line is not clear.

So, since the line is not always clear, you think we should just ignore there is a line, and pretend one doesn't really exist, since we can't possibly determine where that line might be for any given person...correct?

You seem to be arguing that we may only ingest those things absolutely necessary for our survival or that imporve our lives in a way you find acceptable. I don't know why you think you have that right over my body and I know you lack the information to make those decisions for everyone because it depends on the specific details of the individual.

Now you are going out into left field with what I have stated. I merely pointed out that NO ONE is addressing THE PROBLEM! It is not a matter of what I find acceptable, because I am not The King, and what I personally think, is not a factor in what our society will ultimately do. This discussion is about the problem of drug abuse, and what we can do about that as a society. I think the best thing we could do, is be honest... understand the PROBLEM and stop trying to argue (for or against) addressing a symptom. As long as we remain in denial, like you are, and as long as we wrong-headedly think stricter enforcement will combat the drug problem, we are lost... completely and totally lost, chasing after a SYMPTOM of a much more complicated problem, one we simply haven't addressed.

I am not sure what they told him in rehab and I really don't care since so many of them are based around some woo filled pseudo science.

I don't pass judgement on Rush. From what I have read, he was tring to escape PAIN. You can call that immoral if you want, but fuck you! Rush had every right to try to ease his pain. He developed an addiction and went over board.

Well i can guarantee they didn't tell him using drugs was okay or acceptable. Pain is your body's way of telling you something is wrong... there are instances in the hospital, where the doctor may not allow you to have medication for pain, because if they mask the pain, they won't know what the problem is until it's too late. I am not saying Rush didn't have the right to ease his pain, but he became dependent on the pain pills because society has entrenched the idea that... yeah, it's okay to indulge in this if you have pain! If society took a different approach, perhaps the result with Rush would have been different as well?

That's the same thing I have been saying. I just don't ascribe the problem to the seeking of pleasure without which we would be miserable and die young, but over indulgence.

That's because you are living in denial.

 

[Timshel]

I didn't say that... just the opposite! I am CERTAIN it would "feel good" and I would immensely enjoy the feeling! I personally have no desire to destroy my body and health to "feel good" because I don't have any underlying problems that would cause me to have such a desire. I don't choose not to shoot up heroin because it is illegal, I make my decision based on other factors. The same should hold true to any drug of addiction. We have two sides, one side wants to make all these things illegal and punish suppliers/users, the other side want us to legalize it all and say it's acceptable. I am of the opinion neither idea will work, because they fail to address the problem, and attempt to solve it by addressing a symptom.

You don't shoot up because you fear it will not feel good, i.e., it will do you harm. I would never suggest that you should ignore the risks. But risks are everywhere.

Well there have been all kinds of studies on the effects of smoke in the lungs, I can't cite you any links, but I am sure there are some online... try Google! The fact remains, that is how smoke-able drugs work, and an accurate explanation of the side-effects. I'm sorry... I wish this wasn't the case... I wish that our bodies were able to process these artificially-introduced chemicals without consequences, but no matter how much I wish for that to be the case, it never will be. I have to accept medical science, and it says ingesting smoke into your lungs is harmful.

What is the increased risk factor of a stroke for a pot smoker. It should be very easy to prove correlation, if not causation.

Yes... Eating beef is also harmful... And whenever I am feeling depressed and want to escape the realities of life, I go to the Sizzler and order me a 20 oz. T-Bone! Consuming that, makes me feel like all my problems are trivial, and I can relieve the stress of the day, or cope with any emotional pain. The thing is, we don't really have a problem with people over-indulging in beef to compensate for low self-esteem or cope with the realities of life and depression.

Hedonist. How could you pursue pleasure knowing that it MIGHT increase your risks. You have argued that such actions are unacceptable.

More people die every day from complications of an unhealthy diet than probably all the deaths you could scrape together and properly attribute to marijuana from all of recorded history. It is a FAR more serious problem.

If such an epidemic were happening, it wouldn't do much good to make beef illegal, and it wouldn't help the problem by proclaiming beef 'okay' and 'acceptable' to use in that way. The only way to deal with the problem, is to DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM, not the symptom.

What good has been done by making marijuana illegal?

Are you saying it is somehow easier to prohibit marijuana. I seriously doubt it and could give you a laundry list of reasons why it would much easier to prohibit beef. You are either clueless about the economics involved or have not given much thought to that.

So you think we should make the drug legal, and as long as we include a little pamphlet explaining proper use and responsibility, we've done our part? That way, when people abuse the drug, at least our conscience is clear that we did all we could, right? I mean, we legitimized it and said it was okay, but we included a pamphlet! We can't help it if people don't choose to read it!

Your argument is stupid and if you applied it consistently (no worries about that since you are an unprincipled hypocrite) your views would change on numerous subjects.

How is it you don't feel responsible when someone misuses a gun?

Well i can guarantee they didn't tell him using drugs was okay or acceptable. Pain is your body's way of telling you something is wrong... there are instances in the hospital, where the doctor may not allow you to have medication for pain, because if they mask the pain, they won't know what the problem is until it's too late. I am not saying Rush didn't have the right to ease his pain, but he became dependent on the pain pills because society has entrenched the idea that... yeah, it's okay to indulge in this if you have pain! If society took a different approach, perhaps the result with Rush would have been different as well?

It is fucking okay to try and control your pain. Listen dumbfuck, I fucking watched my uncle die slowly and painfully from bone cancer. If it were not for the fact that he was heavily jacked up on morphine, which kept him sleeping through most of it, I would have killed him rather than watch him go through that.

You want to claim there is something immoral with taking pain medication. FUCK YOU! You should stfu and go talk to a doctor, because you are fucking clueless about the miraculous benefits of drugs. You proved your illiteracy on the subject when you started in about "unnatural chemicals." You guys might not realize it, but that natural/unnatural bs, is like a big blinking dunce cap and you fools wear it with a smile.

You think they told Rush to never touch another drug, not a pain reliever, not a medication, not anasthesia, nothing? Maybe if he went to the Scientology clinic. You seem to think that "drugs" means bad and does not include medicine. You do realize, aspirin is a drug.

Looking at Rush and his history with weight I am guessing he is going to need drugs to treat different conditions. If they told him to never touch another he should sue them for malpractice.

Yes, pain has some benefits as feedback, but if you know your back is messed up there is not much more pain is going to tell you. It would be idiotic to say, "oh my body is trying to tell me something... I should listen to my pain and maybe it will tell me what it wants." It wants some motherfucking drugs.

That does not mean you should rush out to get oxycontin everytime you have a little ache. Of course, not. If it's a mild and persistent pain, marijuana may help. Since it is relatively benign and not addictive, it might be worth a shot but talk to your doctor.

I sincerely feel for Rush and the problems he suffered, but I will be damned if I am going to watch people suffer needlessly because he and others have trouble using their meds responsibly. Fuck them, it's their problem to solve. And HELL NO, I don't feel the least bit guilty because I know that many benefit greatly from and are able to extend their lives considerably with, drugs.

That's because you are living in denial.

Nope, you are in denial. You deny reality and claim to deny your own pleasure (just hypocrisy). You do not need drugs to escape because you have never been held by the bonds of reality. Your views are complete bullshit, grounded in nonsense and misconception. They are just a big pile of woo and nothing more.

 

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You don't shoot up because you fear it will not feel good, i.e., it will do you harm. I would never suggest that you should ignore the risks. But risks are everywhere.

I do not fear it won't feel good, I know damn well it would feel good.... so would huffing this can of Dust-Off next to the computer! I don't need to escape reality that bad! Some people do!

What is the increased risk factor of a stroke for a pot smoker. It should be very easy to prove correlation, if not causation.

The risk of stroke is considerably higher among smokers, it is because of what I said. When the brain releases those chemicals which make you feel that high, the side-effect is plaque build up in your arteries. Eventually, the plaque build up accumulates, a piece of it breaks off and travels to your brain and you have a stroke. It can also travel to your heart and block an artery, causing your heart to go into arrest. I don't know what the odds are or what the chances are that this will happen to any given person who smokes pot, I don't care what the odds are, this conversation isn't about the level of risk to smoking pot, it is about the detrimental effects to your health, and that is apparent with ANY THING you ingest as smoke into your lungs.

Hedonist. How could you pursue pleasure knowing that it MIGHT increase your risks. You have argued that such actions are unacceptable.

Please show me where I argued that ANYTHING is "unacceptable?" I'm not seeing that! Probably because I never said it! You like to LIE AND DISTORT when you are losing the argument, and that is typical from you.

More people die every day from complications of an unhealthy diet than probably all the deaths you could scrape together and properly attribute to marijuana from all of recorded history. It is a FAR more serious problem.

Far more people die of chronic drug abuse than have ever died from eating beef.

What good has been done by making marijuana illegal?

Are you saying it is somehow easier to prohibit marijuana. I seriously doubt it and could give you a laundry list of reasons why it would much easier to prohibit beef. You are either clueless about the economics involved or have not given much thought to that.

Again, where have I said that I thought making pot illegal was a good idea? Where have I advocated prohibition? You keep reading stuff into my words for some reason, I guess, you think you can twist my words into an argument you can win or something, I don't know... but the posts are there, you are welcome to read back through them and find where I advocated what you claim.

Your argument is stupid and if you applied it consistently (no worries about that since you are an unprincipled hypocrite) your views would change on numerous subjects.

How is it you don't feel responsible when someone misuses a gun?

Because we don't, as a society, glorify the misuse of guns, the way we glorify drug abuse! If we had people going around saying... It's perfectly okay to shoot your neighbor if they walk across your yard, or if they play the TV too loud... then, I might feel differently about it.

It is fucking okay to try and control your pain. Listen dumbfuck, I fucking watched my uncle die slowly and painfully from bone cancer. If it were not for the fact that he was heavily jacked up on morphine, which kept him sleeping through most of it, I would have killed him rather than watch him go through that.

As I said before, there is a line... It's fine to use drugs to deal with a legitimate pain (in some cases), under the supervision and administration of a medical doctor who knows what he is doing. That isn't what the drug abuse problem in America is about at all, it's a strawman you keep wanting to throw out to rationalize and justify abusing drugs, and remain in complete denial of the problem.

Nope, you are in denial. You deny reality and claim to deny your own pleasure (just hypocrisy). You do not need drugs to escape because you have never been held by the bonds of reality. Your views are complete bullshit, grounded in nonsense and misconception. They are just a big pile of woo and nothing more.

Again, I haven't talked about me or my own pleasures and indulgences here, I've merely introduced a perspective that no one wants to look at, and had rather remain in denial of, obviously. It doesn't matter what kind of indulgences or pleasures I partake in, that isn't the debate. Until we stop pretending this is all okay and acceptable in society, we can't start to deal with the REAL problem. As long as we can use drugs and alcohol as our crutch, and excuse away the abuse of these things, as if it is some 'right' of personal choice, it's impossible to have a fundamental discussion about the REAL problem, what causes the drug abuse, what makes people seek that outlet in the first place... We have to solve THAT before we solve the drug problem, and we simply CAN'T solve that with the mindset you bring to the table.

 

[cancel2 2022]

I see someone has been watching Yes, Minister...

Are you a fan of Yes, Minister? It seems to me that at times it was more a documentary than a fictitious series. Do you get [ame="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0459159/"]"The Thick of It" (2005)@@AMEPARAM@@http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BODc3MDc3MTY3Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzY3NzU0MQ@@._V1._SX99_SY140_.jpg@@AMEPARAM@@BODc3MDc3MTY3Nl5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwMzY3NzU0MQ@@@@AMEPARAM@@SX99@@AMEPARAM@@SY140[/ame]over there?

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

All of those things are possible without government.

The government has prevented innovation in the delivery of educational services which would have reduced costs. Where those innovations are occurring is slow because of a general attitude fostered by government that market forces (i.e., customer choices) should not be allowed to alter education. That dysfunctional attitude is basically a conservatism in education or an attempt to protect the status-quo, whether it is working or not.

Innovation in better providing services to the rich.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

I agree RS. The children of the rich deserve better education.


This is how feudalism began...

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

Explain. Marijuana is just as natural as corn. Is this where you guys use some ridiculous circular logic and label things you don't like as unnatural?

Epic pwn.

 

[FUCK THE POLICE]

And I disagree that extremely addictive drugs like heroin and meth should be legal.

 

[Minister of Truth]

Are you a fan of Yes, Minister? It seems to me that at times it was more a documentary than a fictitious series. Do you get "The Thick of It" (2005)over there?

Yeah, actually I really enjoyed watching Yes, Minister, and that seems to be the standard joke about it. Never seen the other show, wot, wot...

 

[Minister of Truth]

I agree RS. The children of the rich deserve better education.


This is how feudalism began...

Feudalism is a product of manorialism, which developed in Europe as a means to survive during the Dark Ages, after the collapse of civilization. People needed land to be safe on, and the landholders needed fighters to protect them. Thus, feudalism was also born, because landholders lorded over the workers, and skilled warriors were rewarded with knighthoods for their services, including exclusive rights to carry swords and wear armor, etc.

But do continue with your hyperbole...

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Feudalism is a product of manorialism, which developed in Europe as a means to survive during the Dark Ages, after the collapse of civilization. People needed land to be safe on, and the landholders needed fighters to protect them. Thus, feudalism was also born, because landholders lorded over the workers, and skilled warriors were rewarded with knighthoods for their services, including exclusive rights to carry swords and wear armor, etc.

But do continue with your hyperbole...

All crooks have excuses. your overintellectualization of simple things doesn't justify the oppression of feudalism, or the oppresion of globalization, the world plantation system.

 

[Sammy Jankis]

Slavery is necessary, sometimes powerful people want things done and they're rather use violence than fair compensation to conscript labor, but sure, keep on making slavery sound bad. You're not educated like me. I've brainwashed myself into loving cruelty and totalitarianism.

nice.