The Shotgun Blog
Friday, September 19, 2008
Marijuana activist Kirk Tousaw resigns as NDP candidate
From the Vancouver Sun:
Another B.C. NDP candidate with links to marijuana activist Marc Emery has resigned, after video surfaced of him smoking marijuana.
In a statement released by the party Friday afternoon, Kirk Tousaw, the party's candidate in Vancouver Quadra, wrote: "I feel compelled to make this difficult decision in light of the events of the past few days and the likelihood that my past involvement in drug policy reform work might serve to continue to take the focus away from the issues that matter most to Canadians."
An online video from 2005 shows Tousaw smoking marijuana with Emery and others as part of a competition to rate different strains.
On Wednesday we reported that Dana Larsen, the NDP candidate for West Vancouver - Sunshine Coast - Sea to Sky Country, had resigned after similar videos featuring drug use surfaced. In a column for the Western Standard, the "Prince of Pot" Marc Emery, who had played a role in the discussions preceding the resignation, pointed to NDP war room staffer Gerry Scott as the key individual responsible for the decision, which he characterized it as a "sacking". In a message to supporters yesterday, Emery endorsed a number of individual candidates from the Green, Liberal, and Libertarian Parties, but reaffirmed his support for the NDP in the federal election: "just because NDP campaign organizer Gerry Scott is a reactionary old fool is not enough to push me off track to increase the number of NDP MPs in Ottawa."
Like Larsen, Mr. Tousaw is a longtime marijuana activist, he practices criminal law in Vancouver and sits on the board of directors of the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association.
TrackBack URL for this entry:
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Marijuana activist Kirk Tousaw resigns as NDP candidate:
So why are these guys quitting? If they want the laws changed you'd think they might stick to their principles rather than acting ashamed. Pathetic.
Posted by: JC | 2008-09-20 7:43:44 AM
It is sad that the level of prevailing official ignorance is that of the racist fools that brought this Prohibition Idiocy, a century ago.
Check out my podcast of a Radio interview with Len Catling on this subject. I'm running for Vancouver city council.
It is the racist legislation of these myopic legislators, which our government has been recently apologizing for, whose signatures are also on the Prohibition laws.
There was no evidence of marijuana detected in Canada, until 3 decades after the law was enacted, therefore since there was no word of discussion when the law was passed we must assume that the only reason for it was a racist attempt to outlaw cultures which used Cannabis. That can be the only interpretation of the evidence and the subsequent criminal effects on our society.
Therefore it is idiocy to think that we could solve the real problems facing Canada, our biosphere, if we are entrenched in fraud for the purposes of social/political oppression, still, a century later.
These people, Larsen and Tousaw, myself, are being politically oppressed by our culture's fraudulent propaganda enhanced perception, perpetrated so that the right-wing has a political monopoly on ruining this country.
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-20 10:17:41 AM
Budoracle wrote: “It is sad that the level of prevailing official ignorance is that of the racist fools that brought this Prohibition Idiocy, a century ago.”
Ignorant, racist, fools, idiocy, and of course, self-importance. Congratulations, Budoracle; seldom have I seen the ethos of the angry Left compacted down to its irreducible essence with such eloquence.
Budoracle wrote: “Check out my podcast of a Radio interview with Len Catling on this subject. I'm running for Vancouver city council.”
Do you have any qualifications for public office other than vanity and a big mouth?
Budoracle wrote: “It is the racist legislation of these myopic legislators, which our government has been recently apologizing for, whose signatures are also on the Prohibition laws.”
So every piece of legislation ever signed by that generation of lawmakers is a racist sham? My, aren’t we the evolved one. Too bad A isn’t proof of B.
Budoracle wrote: “There was no evidence of marijuana detected in Canada, until 3 decades after the law was enacted, therefore since there was no word of discussion when the law was passed we must assume that the only reason for it was a racist attempt to outlaw cultures which used Cannabis.”
If there was no marijuana use for three decades after it was outlawed, that puts a serious dent in the stoner’s claim that prohibition increases drug use. Marijuana use increased because a bunch of hippies were mad at the world and needed an issue to rebel against. One of the baby boomers’ darker legacies.
Budoracle wrote: “That can be the only interpretation of the evidence and the subsequent criminal effects on our society.”
There’s never only one interpretation. Tell me, if you are the kind of person who embarks on fiery moral crusades without any thought or care whatever for moderation or sensibility, how are you an improvement over the “racist fools” of a century ago?
Budoracle wrote: “Therefore it is idiocy to think that we could solve the real problems facing Canada, our biosphere, if we are entrenched in fraud for the purposes of social/political oppression, still, a century later.”
That’s right, Budoracle; society is slowly being obliterated, crushed unrecognizably, under the bitter, chafing yoke of official sanctions for the use or sale of self-destructive and in many cases socially destructive drugs. Oh, the humanity. The ages will weep for us, and the agonies of the damned will resound through song and legend for ten thousand years after the fall of the Prohibitionists. Doomed to take their place among the Sophists and the Pharisees, they, to dwell in adamantine chains and penal fire, who durst defy the omnipotent to arms.
Budoracle wrote: “These people, Larsen and Tousaw, myself, are being politically oppressed by our culture's fraudulent propaganda enhanced perception, perpetrated so that the right-wing has a political monopoly on ruining this country.”
Not nearly as much as mainstream society is being oppressed by your kind’s constant marching, barricading, bullhorning, burning of effigies, breaking of windows, trashing of frankenfood labs, spiking of trees, flashing of mirrors at Hydro workers, and other assorted thuggeries. So tell me, what she we do to you?
It's like I said, Budo my boy; marijuana will probably get a better reception once it gets respectable advocates instead of skanky creeps.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-20 10:42:46 AM
Correction: What SHALL we do to you?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-20 10:46:54 AM
That's a unique defence.
People who understand the obvious brain damage marijuana causes people like budoracle are racist?
Nice try. What a dope!
Posted by: set you free | 2008-09-20 10:48:30 AM
One more thing to examine carefully. If you go to the video where Dana Larsen is on LSD and leave your judgmental attitude and preconceptions behind, you will see the truth of my next statement for yourself.
Knowing the Journey one is on when under the influence of six drops of LSD personally and thinking of perhaps indulging once more before my life ends, I can say with confidence that Dana Larsen was not impaired. He might be guilty of being boring, but I challenge anyone to point out any of the classic indications of Alcohol impairment, which is our measure of impairment.
He does not slur his words, he does not seem unbalanced and can walk a straight line. He holds forth rational thoughts and observations (perhaps sparse in words, unlike me). There is no problem with hand/eye coordination.
I see guys with 2 beers in them undergo severe personality changes, fall down, laugh and talk nonsense, slur their words and thoughts, make poor irrational decisions.
Where's the super danger here that we have to oppress people and cause layers of crime for? Why do we consider it fine to make people criminals for finding a different way of enlightenment?
Who are the insane ones, really? I hear the note of smug society judgment heaped on the news articles, as if Dana Larsen were doing something idiotic.
I see the true IDIOTS as being the ones who would risk violent organized crime ridden lawless society, to keep the likes of good, intelligent, people enjoying something different and harmless for enjoying their fredom as anyone else.
I have found my true spiritual core and widened my entire life perspective through the enjoyable use of LSD and been no more "loaded" apparently to anyone else, than Dana was during this video.
This is our right as living entities to do without interference of state tyranny. For this I seek a jury to make our society safe again. To end the smug entrenched idiocy.
It is you, and those who laugh smugly at Dana Larsen and myself who are the true idiots.
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-20 11:21:41 AM
Shane Thanks for your thorough study of my post. It shows me that I have touched you. Of course it thrilling as a writer to receive indication of how powerful ones words can be.
I believe that these words of rebuttal are fine and stimulating and certainly valid if your are one of those born with a conservative gene. For my unique perception of this see "Do humans have a political gene?"
Also as a well read blogger, short story writer who has had many reactions to my writings, I am satisfied that they draw a balanced review that always impresses me with their emotional depth.
This satisfies me as a writer, so thanks for the detailed review and expressing your heartfelt emotions.
You should try LSD sometime, you might benefit from the enhanced perceptions.
Also you are right, I am a loud mouth and proud of it like all loud mouths, eh Mr. Harper!
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-20 11:38:28 AM
Set you free? to be an insulting moron?
Yes you bible thumping revisionist, that is exactly what Steve has been apologizing and paying for, the racist legislation and fundamentalist lies of your temperance predecessors.
Morons like you have been sitting their hatefull carcasses, bloated with indoctrinated lies across the path of reason to the point where you deny the vision of your eyes. Look at the video and point out to us where Dana Larsen can be said to be impaired. So if you can't can you ask yourself why he needs to be made a criminal and organized crime be created to service his free choice?
Point out oh, brain enhanced judgmental one, where Dana Larsen's behavior on LSD is in any way more abnormal than the spectacles in Pentacostal Churches when the Spirit moves them.
Until this becomes apparent in law, men of reason and justice like myself (see I trusted the RCMP) will call you on your idiocy, no matter how much you crave a police state.
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-20 12:41:55 PM
Budoracle wrote: “Knowing the Journey one is on when under the influence of six drops of LSD personally and thinking of perhaps indulging once more before my life ends, I can say with confidence that Dana Larsen was not impaired. He might be guilty of being boring, but I challenge anyone to point out any of the classic indications of Alcohol impairment, which is our measure of impairment.”
This is purely anecdotal evidence given by an untrained (and biased) observer. It proves nothing. Do you honestly expect people to change their minds based on a single amateur video shot by a bunch of stoners with such appalling judgement that they drove the Sea to Sky while high?
Budoracle wrote: “He does not slur his words, he does not seem unbalanced and can walk a straight line. He holds forth rational thoughts and observations (perhaps sparse in words, unlike me). There is no problem with hand/eye coordination.”
What objective, scientific tests did you undertake to determine his reaction time? His depth perception? His spatial perception? Or are you basing your entire assessment on his ability to keep his drool in his mouth? Also, since it takes only about 400 micrograms of LSD to produce a full-blown trip, what was the concentration of those “drops” of LSD?
Budoracle wrote: “I see guys with 2 beers in them undergo severe personality changes, fall down, laugh and talk nonsense, slur their words and thoughts, make poor irrational decisions.”
Like driving one of B.C.’s most dangerous and rugged highways while higher than a kite, for example?
Budoracle wrote: “Where's the super danger here that we have to oppress people and cause layers of crime for? Why do we consider it fine to make people criminals for finding a different way of enlightenment?”
People taking drugs seek oblivion, not enlightenment.
Budoracle wrote: “Who are the insane ones, really?”
Let’s see. There’s the guy who pulled out all his teeth with a pair of pliers; the guy who bit off a woman’s nose; the woman who fried her own baby in cooking oil; the twitchy junkies; the dopey stoners; those who seek enlightenment by hallucination.
Budoracle wrote: “I hear the note of smug society judgment heaped on the news articles, as if Dana Larsen were doing something idiotic.”
Keep talking, sweetheart. Any chance you may have had of getting elected is disappearing faster than summer dew in the morning sun.
Budoracle wrote: “I see the true IDIOTS as being the ones who would risk violent organized crime ridden lawless society, to keep the likes of good, intelligent, people enjoying something different and harmless for enjoying their fredom as anyone else.”
The black market exists because there are people who will patronize it, Budoracle. Those who don’t care if a whole criminal enterprise takes root to feed their habit. Find me a dope smoker or any other drug user, and I’ll show you a profoundly selfish, narcissistic, hedonistic, often delusional individual. People like yourself.
Budoracle wrote: “I have found my true spiritual core and widened my entire life perspective through the enjoyable use of LSD and been no more "loaded" apparently to anyone else, than Dana was during this video.”
Drugs are like guns, Budoracle. They can both do things nothing else can do, and there are times when they’re absolutely necessary. But they are not personality or status enhancers. If you’re not enough without them, you’ll never be enough with them.
Budoracle wrote: “This is our right as living entities to do without interference of state tyranny. For this I seek a jury to make our society safe again. To end the smug entrenched idiocy. It is you, and those who laugh smugly at Dana Larsen and myself who are the true idiots.”
You’re admitting to being an LSD user; you make the incredible claim that LSD does not alter your perception or your judgement; you are running for public office, having confessed all of this; and you call US the idiots? Holy shit, and I thought the stoners were crazy.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-20 4:09:20 PM
Budo wrote: “Shane Thanks for your thorough study of my post. It shows me that I have touched you. Of course it thrilling as a writer to receive indication of how powerful ones words can be.”
Budo wrote: “I believe that these words of rebuttal are fine and stimulating and certainly valid if your are one of those born with a conservative gene.”
Your beliefs do not constitute established science, Budo. And a person’s politics are generally more a product of early life experience than genetics.
Budo wrote: “For my unique perception of this see "Do humans have a political gene?”
Oh, I’m quite sure it’s as unique as the rest of your musings.
Budo wrote: “Also as a well read blogger, short story writer who has had many reactions to my writings, I am satisfied that they draw a balanced review that always impresses me with their emotional depth.”
Provoking a reaction is not the same as saying something important.
Budo wrote: “You should try LSD sometime, you might benefit from the enhanced perceptions.”
Why should I do that? My imagination works fine without it. My brain, apparently unlike yours, is already firing on all cylinders.
Budo wrote: “Also you are right, I am a loud mouth and proud of it like all loud mouths, eh Mr. Harper!”
Harper’s not a loudmouth…on the contrary, his opponents are wont to accuse him of being surly, withdrawn, and closemouthed. The Dippers, on the other hand…
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-20 4:14:43 PM
P.S. Although no scientific studies have been done so far as I am aware, I'm pretty sure that the reaction time and spatial perception of regular churchgoers is not significantly different from that of the general population. According to science, the same isn't true of regular drug users.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-20 4:16:43 PM
Yeah, what you morons prove is that fed enough lies you disbelieve your eyes and argue the opposite.
You prove how moronic you are because he is not impaired by any of the markers used to measure impairment.
You also prove that judgmental hatred of others is the core of your religion.
But again I'm glad to have touched your moronic minds into this fine display of your abilities.
Go snort some jesus sandals and measure the mental awareness of the holy rollers.
this will give you credibility. Be happy and revel in your mindless hatred you deserve it.
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-20 6:03:13 PM
Speaking of being higher than a kite. It takes skill and extreme awarenes and good judgment to be able to fly a hang glider long distance while soaring. This I did while under the influence of Cannabis for 3 decades.
I also retired an unblemished professional drivers license I held for 40 years to go green. Yes I was always under the influences.
Just because you paint him higher than a kite doesn't mean I deny what I am seeing: A rational person driving his car with no hint of impairment.
All you are doing is ranting lies and idiocy proven that by what we see.
You are mindless believers upholding evil.
You would insert your choice between what god decreed in your bible.
He gave everyone the freedom of choice of good or evil and declared all seed bearing plants good.
No, you are stupid regurgitaters of propaganda to the point where you would argue that white is black. It is due to your entrenched idiocy that we are nearing the end of our existence as a species. See Institutionalized Idiocy
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-20 6:20:33 PM
Provoking a reaction is not the same as saying something important."
So, Judgmental Shane Mathews, can you point to one thing of importance that you have said which originated with yourself.
Also, I have challenged anyone to find one instance/example of impairment of Dana in the video. Though you have spent a huge amount of energy denigrating me, you haven't been able to come up with one, have you. Some hokey thing about the holy rollers reaction time being better. Nothing one can get their hands on though.
Again show me one example of impairment on the video. Why not stick to the facts instead of trying to attack me. SHOW ME AN EXAMPLE OF IMPAIRMENT!
I have pointed to hundreds of well written articles, thoughts and short stories.
Can you point to any original work by you, oh master judge?
Point out just a few posts where you state something original in a positive way, rather than denigrating others' words like the slimy lying hateful godsucker that you are.
That is why I, and millions of intelligent people don't believe in religion anymore, although I've read the bible 3 times: because morons like you show me that there is no hint of a higher being or spirituality in your nonsense, only hate and vile behavior, denigrating others and sitting in for the judgment of god.
Always for war where the bible says to turn the other cheek. Hypocrites and hateful liars are who you are. Enjoy your vile crap because it will not be influencing me anymore. Just read my blog and stop in if you visit Vancouver to help out my run for council by making a campaign contribution.
And people with a brain, fond of enjoying altered states can do so by being in contact with me, until the government steps up and provides controlled distribution.
This dangerous criminal reign of idiocy brought in by your moron racist ancestors will end for Canadians now, or go on over my dead body, Idiots!
Come get me: Morons< Harper, Day! And you godsuckers who have installed a landscape of lawless violence for our children with your judgmental idiocy can stick it where your pervert priests were sticking it to the natives.
I've had enough of your mindless political oppression and tyranny for practicing the freedom of choice I was born with. Do what you will, I fear nothing! And unlike you, always denigrating, I am pro actively standing up for something, which is my right in a free country.
As anyone would know if you read my well written blog. Stockwell Day even had an auto reminder until his office rejected it last week. I'm still doing my thing openly unmolested by your murdering storm troopers.
So make my Day and call him up to assert your self righteous judgment.
Not going to happen, because the Prohibition laws would fall tomorrow.
I have a right to exercise those rights every living creature, not withstanding what morons like you think, is born with since the first thing that wiggled: to chose to ingest whatever substance I wish for any purpose.
Certainly, if you can raise young women expressly for sexual purposes in this province because you say it is your right under freedom of religion like the Mormons of Bountiful, I can do what I am doing with consenting adults, because I have a right to believe in science and natural selection as the mechanism of evolution to the same degree. Especially since their is no under aged third person involved. especially if the purpose is to make our children and playgrounds safer from the scourge of crime driven addiction at an ever younger age.
Come and get me, morons! Make my Day!
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-20 7:18:28 PM
1. One thing of importance: Drugs impair perception, judgement, and motor control. Your assertion to the contrary is false and its face and starkly delusional.
2. Impairment is determined by tests, not a grainy home video that shows a man able to walk erect. That’s why we have blood tests, breathalyzers, and other tests.
3. Reaction time: That’s right. You know better than all the scientists and lawmakers. Sure you do. Another delusion.
4. I will say what is well-written and what is not. You have pointed to nothing but vanity pages and puff pieces.
5. I am not required to be positive, only truthful.
6. I will tell you if you are intelligent or not. As a man with a general IQ of 151 and a logical IQ of 164, I’m better prepared than 98 percent of the population to make that call, certainly better prepared than a self-confessed acid huffer.
7. Writing original work doesn’t make you right. I am not interested in your so-called accomplishments. Either what you write is true or it is not. There is no grey area. And judging from your sentence structure, I don’t think I’ll bother reading any of it.
8. We do not care what you have had enough of. If you want to make a fight of it, spit on a cop or something and he will cure you of your delusions of invulnerability.
9. Only the dead and the insane have no fear. I think we know which you are.
10. “Murdering storm troopers.” Wow. Say hi to Chewbacca for me.
11. You really are too full of yourself for you own good, you know that? Well, pop another pill and keep working on that attitude. It’s pretty. I’m sure the voters will just lap it up.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-20 8:21:30 PM
Shane Matthews please just go to church and keep your business your business.
Posted by: Andrew Thomas | 2008-09-20 8:57:28 PM
you have restated your opinions of me without any supporting evidence. i really don't care what a self admitted moron like you thinks of me. It is other who will judge our words and who speaks the truth.
So Again I thank you for allowing me to show everyone some evidence that they can judge for themselves and made reasonable arguments agianstr your idiocy without personally atticng you instead of your words.
Those of intelligence are able to understand the opportunity that you give me with your vitriolic postS AND CHILDISH UNSUPPORTED JUDGMENTS.
THEY CAN JUDGE FOR THEMSELVES AND WILL.
I AM CONFIDENT THAT SHOULD I COME BEFORE A JURY OF 12 THAT THEY WILL SEE REASON UNDER THE LAWS AS WELL.
WHAT YOU THINK IS OBVIOUSLY IRRELEVANT TO REALITY AS ARE YOUR MYOPIC JUDGMENTS. I AM PROTECTED FROM THE TYRANNY OF IDIOTS SUCH AS YOURSELF AS ARE THE MORMOMS OF BOUNTIFUL. WAIT AND SEE WHO IS IMPAIRED MY RELIGIOUS GODSUCKING FRIEND.
LISTEN TO MY PODCAST FOR A RATIONAL EXPLANATION WITHOUT HATE OR DENIGRATION OF ANYONE.
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-20 9:14:33 PM
As long as people like you fuel crime where I live, Andrew, marijuana use is my business. In classic counterculture fashion, you blame the government, but the true fault lies with you.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-20 9:54:53 PM
1. For what opinions have I provided no evidence? You keep ranting over and over to look at the video. I keep telling you that you don't have to be noticeably drunk or stoned to be impaired. But the truth keeps bouncing off.
2. That paragraph is perhaps the most disjointed you've ever crafted. Dis-jointed...get it? Must be time for your next fix.
3. Those of intelligence, Budo, will not vote for you. One look at your ranting, delusional writing would tell anyone you're several bricks short of a load.
4. Yes. They will. And not in your favour, if this is how you talk during election time.
5. Like hell. If you're ever brought to trial you'll beg to be tried by a judge only, because any jury would send you to Riverview.
6. If you're protected from the tyranny of idiots, Budo, why do you keep ranting about it?
7. Got a link to that podcast?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-20 10:00:26 PM
My hateful and sadly lacking opponent, Shane, if you look back at the top of our posts you will see that i stated my views and that you decided to set the tone of the conversation with insults to me personally, that is when I began calling you that "g" word. I've been talking to someone much more spiritual and intelligent han what you claim to be (unsupported of course).
For bringing out the worst in us I truly apologize for my part, neither do I retract a single word. What we have here is a few verbal barbs by me, but you, you have the weight of an unjust law which is causing much dysfunction in our society. No matter how ugly you become in your wash of me, brought on by your hatred of my free thought, the facts will never change.
I will not need to inflate my own worth by stating unsupported IQ figures (to tell you how stupid I really am, I didn't know that there were two types of IQ's).
I'll just let my words, not my self-inflated unsupported opinion of myself stand for me.
If you, sir, are in the top two percent of humanity as you claim, why are you wasting your exalted breath on me?
To think of where that puts me, as others compare our words, will show them that your reasoning and deduction powers leave a lot to be desired, are flawed terminally.
Surely my writings can't be that good!
And of course while you are humble, I do tout my own deeds, writings, every chance I get (its called marketing, self promotion and is common in the writing field-we all try to write ourselves into existence, although some don't have much to offer except boring tiresome hate)
Rather than make up fraudulent claims of excellence, to back up your insults, you'll find that creating something in a positive passion, will get you further.
Get some sleep grasshopper...
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-21 12:32:38 AM
That's why they call it dope.
Posted by: CJ | 2008-09-21 2:06:35 AM
This thread is the classic example of political oppression supported by the government through it prohibition laws.
The crown attorney will see this as evidence of the violent hatred against me for expressing my free thought.
I am waiting Mr. Day. It takes a lot more skill and intelligence to stand on a mountain top and declare an out and return flight on an unpowered hang glider of 50ks and do it, than to hop on the a noisy seadoo and gun the throttle.
Anytime you wanna play chess Mr. Day, we'll see how stupid a marijuana user can be compared to the Minister of Public Safety.
What we have here is clearly oppression sanctioned and encouraged by the government for do what is a natural act.
Anytime you want to go to court I would love to go! So you know where I'm at and what I'm doing.
and in the end I expect to get an Order of Canada, like the other guy these religious fanatics razzed for standing up for an individual's rights and freedoms, Dr. Morgantaler.
It's about time the idiocy of these small minded hateful morons be curbed
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-21 12:07:14 PM
1. I insulted your arguments, not you personally. What criticism there is of you personally is demonstrably true. You have your own words to thank for that; they betray your every thought, on the few occasions you can be said to think at all. As for who you’ve been talking to, couldn’t care less. It’s not always about you, you know.
2. You seem to think that because you disagree with the law, you get to make more barbs and chuck more mud. That is classic activist self-justification—“it’s really the other party’s fault.” Your thoughts aren’t free—they’re chained to your acid habit. As for the facts, they do not support your side.
3. You have grossly inflated your worth by dropping hints about who you associate with, what you have written (which you by your own words claim to be very *well*-written), and directed people as energetically as possible to a talking head of yourself. You’re in no position to complain of boasting on the part of others.
4. You will need two crutches, then, if you have nothing to stand on but your words. You’ll find them poor supports.
5. Because it pleases me to do so.
6. We’ll see where others put your words on election day.
7. No, it’s called boasting.
8. Passion is forbidden as a foundation for policy. You may consider facts and ethics only.
9. At least I don’t need drugs to help me sleep.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-21 7:06:44 PM
1. A free blog is the classic example of political oppression? If the government is supporting me for being here, then my cheque got lost in the mail.
2. I thought you said the populace would rally to your banner. Now you accuse them of hating you. In any case, other people’s opinion of you will not be relevant to the charges.
3. Blah, blah.
4. As the challenged party, Mr. Day gets to select the game, not you.
5. Don’t use words like “clearly” or “obviously” in your argument. They weaken it.
6. Given that Marc Emery will probably spend most of his adult life in prison for taking the exact same path you’ve started along, hotshot, I must conclude you are insane. Insanity is defined as repeating a failed plan in the hope of a different result.
7. Yes, Morgantaler is definitely a kindred spirit with you—huge ego, vast self-importance, total narcissism, not afraid to leave a trail of corpses in his wake so long as he gets what he wants. Yes, you really know how to pick them.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-21 7:12:46 PM
Shane Mathews, you really are a very hateful small minded person, but entitled to be so in peace. Equally I'm entitled to be left alone from the myopic judgmental harassment of people such as yourself in this year 2008, because I have declared it so the precedent having been set by the Mormons of Bountiful, god bless them everyone. and you too Winston, I truly pitty you and the burden of 26 wives! But if everyone is happy, why not, eh?
It is my bold assertion of my freedom which touches you in a tender spot, Shane Mathews.
A nation, society, species must never stay stagnant as those fundamentalists such as yourself would have us do with biblical laws interpreted by you.
When the truth is that at a distance, judging only by what we can observe, no group of observers would be able to pick out the Cannabis smokers from the tobacco smokers. The only thing you don't like is how cannabis smokers become more liberated and lose interest in your consumer values.
There is no difference in the behavior of Cannabis users in any social setting that can be distinguished by the trained or average person.
Cannabis users can be easily distinguished from alcohol users at a glance, though. They are apparently not inebriated.
We can see that in Dana Larsen's behavior and control of his car. Even on LSD he carries on coherently, walks normally, produces a TV show, without it being apparent anywhere that he is out of control, has a behavior change, makes irrational statements, is a danger to himself or anyone else, is even "on" anything but some introspective contemplation.
I have been to many Pentacostal Spirit filled services and if that kind of display and behavior is allowed in public, certainly Dana Larsen's and mine is.
If you've read about Albert Hofmann's first trip and bicycle ride home, you will note that at no time did he believe he was impaired. Just because want to label something fraudulently as being evil and thereby illegal, doesn't mean that I don't have protection under the law from your nonsense, in the year 2008.
Did you go and give up your hate to the one you love today, swaying in a happy ceremony free to believe what you wished? If you can believe in your fiction, I will have mine!
Yiou don't get call me names and denigrate me, nor make a criminal out of me because I chose to something different in my tea. end of story!
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-21 7:35:26 PM
1. Getting personal is the mark of the amateur. I can’t believe how much you suck. And you are not entitled to anything from me unless I decide you’re entitled to it.
2. No, I just enjoy tweaking your ludicrously overblown sensitivities. I would classify it as very “light” entertainment—me matching wits with you really is rather like swatting a fly with a truck.
3. I don’t wish to see the drug laws stagnated. I wish to see them strengthened.
4. You wouldn’t know the rapists and the murderers, either. That’s why cops have to do investigations instead of just snapping crooks off the street without proof. What kind of flaky shit is this?
5. See 4.
6. You’re saying there are no visible signs of being stoned? Are you stoned now?
7. Yes, because it’s impossible to stage and edit a video to tell the story you want it to.
8. A is not proof of B.
9. Belief is irrelevant.
10. Believe what you want. But act according to the law or take the consequence.
11. Yes I do, for any reason at all. Hail, freedom!
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-21 7:46:29 PM
Shane Mathews, although you wish to twist in the wind with lies, your words and mine are here forever and no matter how many numbered points you make, backed with self inflated IQ ratings, no one who isn't as delusional as you would be able to follow your logic.
Your vile words, Shane Mathews will be used to dismantle the idiocy of prohibition that you wish to keep in place vile.
you are lost arguing with yourself because you dislike my politics.
It is you who wishes to assert your ideology over me. Mind your own business Shane Mathews, I'll mind mine.
No one is asking you to do anything different I am just demanding the same right to my beliefs as you. You are against freedom of choice for abortions, you are against equality for gays, you are against freedoms and liberties of individuals, you wish to control everyone.
I chose to commune with nature my way. I don't believe in Adam and Eve, nor the god of the bible, nor anything you do. I have a right to be free of your judgments as well.
If you can legally drive by spewing burnt hydrocarbons and carcinogens into my lungs for the pleasure and convenience of personal transportation, I will inhale what I wish.
when they Prohibit the burning of fossil fuels and restrict and control all the industrial effluents that I am being forced to ingest, inhale, and experience through climate change, then we will talk about what you might restrict me from ingesting of my own volition.
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-21 9:15:07 PM
when they Prohibit the burning of fossil fuels and restrict and control all the industrial effluents that I am being forced to ingest, inhale, and experience through climate change, then we will talk about what you might restrict me from ingesting of my own volition.
Posted by: budoracle | 21-Sep-08 9:15:07 PM
Climate Change is a natural phenomenon. The idea that it can be stpped is one promoted by the Green Communists and the Corportae contol freaks. Good luck restricting nature.
Posted by: JC | 2008-09-21 9:20:34 PM
Yes JC, so much as humans are part of nature, but not the burning of fossil fuels for transportation and the making of chemicals from petroleum, which like heroin was, is a legal and truly addictive uncontrolled dangerous consumer habit. Let's deal with it the same way our ancestors did with heroin. Let's prohibit it, criminally.
Yes JC, also there are receptors in my body for the THC molecule, that have a traceable molecular genetic history of more than 500,000 years, therefore my right to satisfy those receptors within my body are there since a half million years before I was born.
This is part of the course of my natural evolution, inherited with my body chemistry since the very first living entity. These rights supersede any right to any human control, especially one as myopic and racist as the temperance movements, which clamored for these prohibition laws. This includes those right wing politicians who quietly conceded to the racist sentiments prevalent at the times, or for any contrived reason you might wish to include today.
There is no real reason to keep Cannabis from our culture compared to any of the other dangerous habits we are allowing, which directly impact others. These substances are not necessary but still we allow it, why? I have more of a right to demand a change and the prohibition of fossil fuels for the reason of giving my offspring a chance at life, than any one has to limit my intake of any substance I chose.
It is as natural as climate change can ever be argued to be, JC. Although I don't believe for a second that it is a natural phenomena, but rather a consumer habit which is highly addictive and is killing all of us slowly and many suddenly.
You can't win this one because there is a wrong and a right and it is absolute and doesn't depend on what you believe. You can ;lie to yourself but it is still a lie, and hangs there like a fart in an elevator full of people trying to ignore it.
It is more natural to wish to chews herbs and substances that produce psychotropic effects, by several hundred thousand years for humans, according to the genetic molecular record, than any concept of god. In fact it can be argued that the first visions of the supernatural for humans were probably a result of multi generational use of of these substances. At bio record points unerringly to everything I say,
Religion could very well be the product of habitual generational religious hallucinations.
What are the Pentecostals doing when the spirit settles upon the congregation? Is it my business to try to control them because this could prove to be dangerous allowing churches to control huge swaths of people and lead them to political concentrations of power, which are in practical opposition to democracy, by concentrating the votes of many to the will of a few. This is antithetic to the concept of democracy which is based on each individual exercising their free will.
Is it really true that you can't see how controlling that you wish to be over me, yet you see yourselves to be free to believe any nonsense you wish uninhibited by me. I have much evidence all around us of the xtremes in violence that is caused by fundamental religious beliefs.
Genocide, mass suicides, holy wars and mass tramplings during huge worship ceremonies are killing millions of people directly. It is the churches, muslims, and jewish religions which have caused untold deaths in the last century.
Religion is totally unnatural and dangerous to our existence. a nation of religious fanatics with a leader who believes in Armageddon like the one to the south of us has his finger on some 20000 nuclear weapons. We have seen his religious judgments and their effects on our world.
Point to any real calamities caused by marijuana backed up with evidence.....
I know which habit are dangerous to me. I have a sense of the real dangers facing us not some contrived drug propaganda to scare people like you who can't think for themselves. you are the type of person who believed GWB and still do.
Go away you dumb believer, you sicken me with your stupid irrational assertions.
I am entitled to be free of the yoke of morons like you and I am. I have stepped up from under your yoke of oppression, saying screw you Mr. Harper, Day and JC all at once.
I don't have one second's doubt that I will shred this Idiocy asunder in court.
If not I will cease to eat until I check out of this nation ruled by racist idiots. I've gone 13 days on behalf of Stella Bignel, mother of Neil Stonechild-murdered by a christian cop. Her plea of "someone knows something" was heart wrenching to me.
Yes, I do have a right as a responsible intelligent adult, a scientist, to chart my own course without the tyranny of morons like you being imposed on me by the state.
That is the same right to believe in the nature of things as the Mormons have to believe their creed and chart their own course unless someone complains.
I mean really how many youngsters of both sexes have fallen victims to every religion's pastors? So why are these Mormon people targeted in the first place, as a religion? why not outlaw Catholicism since many catholic priests have been guilty of sexual rape of minors?
Just get used to it. You morons don't own the world any more. Little Mosque on the Prairie is here to stay. I will have my LSD and Cannabis anytime I choose to. Until you can prove that I am impaired by unbiased scientific method, I should be able to sue you for implying that I am.
This Dr. Wayne Jeffries, who is the expert is a hokey self inflated unaccountable idiot like the the pathologist Dr. Smith, recently on rtrial for ruining so many lives. His science which is attempting to criminalize Canadian by subjective examinations on the side of the road done by cops brainwashed in the concept and trained like monkeys to repeat flawed tasks.
This BS is directly imported by our trusted RCMP from the DEA. There are no verifiable scientific studies or tests anywhere that show any level of impairment for cannabis users in their driving performance.
In fact most studies show a slight increase in performance.
You can lie all you want but will not come up with any credible peer reviewed evidence to discredit my assertions.
But then we see no evidence that you use rational deduction, verifiable facts as the basis for your conclusions, do we?
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-21 11:12:57 PM
1., 2., 3. Blah, blah.
4. That’ll be the day. For both of us.
5. As I said before, you have every right to your beliefs. But your actions belong to your society insofar as they affect it. You’re the type who accepts responsibility only when it’s rammed down your throat with a stake. Those last three assertions, by the way, are blatant falsehoods. But then, activists and politicians are not noted for their honesty.
6. No one has the right to be free of judgement. Where’d you get that idea?
7. Auto exhaust isn’t carcinogenic, Budo. It consists almost entirely of carbon and nitrogen oxides and water vapour. You’re thinking of marijuana smoke.
8. You seem to think you have the power to bargain here, Budo. You don’t.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-22 7:26:26 AM
1. It’s not dangerous, because carbon dioxide isn’t much of a greenhouse gas. Methane is much worse, and North America produces unusually high quantities of methane because of its enormous beef industry. (Cows fart.) And cars get cleaner every year. Marijuana, on the other hand, gets stronger every year.
2. Really? Does this mean I have the right to satisfy my instinctive male bloodlust with the blood of those who irritate me, a male urge to compete far older than the 500,000 years you claim for your THC receptors? And they’re CANNIBINOL receptors, genius.
3. Biochemical predestiny. How sweet. You pulling rights out of the air now? Or more likely, out of your 500,000-year-old ass?
4. JC’s given you one; I’ve given you several. The law and learned doctors have given even more. None of it makes any difference to you because you’re a malignant narcissist You want what you want when you want it, and so far as you’re concerned that ends the matter. “In the end, it is all about me.”
5. Climate change is addictive? So far there hasn’t been any sign of climate change a regular person could detect. The seas haven’t risen, and our weather isn’t any different.
6. You’re right that the wrongness or rightness of something doesn’t turn upon JC’s beliefs, Budo. But that also means that it doesn’t turn upon your own, either. And you would never accept that.
7. How do you know what the religious beliefs of prehistoric humans were? Fertility idols tens of thousands of years old have been unearthed. But curiously unaccompanied by bongs.
8. Says who, besides you?
9. Church attendance is voluntary, Budo.
10. Get over yourself, already. When will you learn to accept that this is not about you?
11. War and pillage are never about religion; that’s just what charismatic conquerors tell the masses. With rare exceptions, wars are fought for power or wealth.
12. Better tell that to the two-thirds-plus of the world population who are believers of some sort, Budo. And the correct number is 11,000 weapons. Russia has the other 11,000.
13. Um…how about the scourge of drug addiction in contemporary culture? That’s a calamity, no? And practically every addict you’ll talk to, he started on pot.
14. You know nothing, Budo. And your pathological need to dump on Bush, who did not begin the “drug war,” merely shows what kind of person YOU are.
15. No, I think I’ll assert my liberty and stay right here. Especially if it bugs you.
16. No, you’re not, and no, you’re not. You wouldn’t be moaning so much if you were. You are of course free to say what you like, but as Mark Twain once said, it is better to keep your mouth shut, and be thought a fool, than to open it and remove all doubt.
17. I don’t have a second’s doubt that the day you wind up in court is the day they put you on a bus to Riverview.
18. Go ahead. More food for us, and cleaner air, too. And nobody cares what you find heart-wrenching. Remember, it’s not all about you.
19. You’re a scientist? Recite the scientific method. WITHOUT LOOKING IT UP.
20. Nothing new here.
21. Not as many youngsters who have fallen victim to drugs.
22. Oh, this is priceless. Blessed are the stoned; they shall inherit the Earth.
23. Blah, blah.
24. I knew we’d find the anti-Americanism in here somewhere.
25. What studies?
26. Attacking the evidence instead of denying the assertion. The age-old ploy of the guilty.
27. Yes, it is so much better to take serious decisions while stoned. Hand me that bong, will you?
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-22 7:51:14 AM
You are a moron of the contentious kind with hate of others at your center
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-22 10:06:19 AM
Consider your surrender accepted, Budo.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-22 10:27:51 AM
As I say, I will be in court trying to keep the Canadian Government from committing "Genocide" as Dr. Julio Montana said this morning.
Under no circumstances will I allow morons such as yourself to oppress people with you idiocy, legally,
Posted by: budoracle | 2008-09-22 12:12:17 PM
When's your court date, Ghandi? I need to know which judge to bribe. :-)
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-22 12:49:19 PM
P.S. Please, oh please tell me you'll be representing yourself.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2008-09-22 12:56:46 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.