Fox host defends Republicans’ right to smoke pot

[danimal7]

im so fucking sick of all this Retardican & Dummycrat bullshit. people wake up !the corperations run everything,between campaign donations and lobbist....
BTW congress just lifted the limit on how much corps can donate to campaigns

 

[rootfingers]

Was not congress who lifted that limit it was the supreme court. Decision 5-4 down ideological (con v lib) lines. Our only hope now is congress. Obama is portraying a pissed vibe about it and promises action from him and congress. We'll see.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

SCOTUS ferked up. Corporations with foreign owners and/or shareholders won't be able to contribute because there not citizens. But unions will be able to give all they want.

 

[rootfingers]

huh, unions giving really doesn't bother me too much. I have a thing for well organized racketeering. Just kidding. . . kinda.

Are these non-citizen corporations not given citizens' rights then too? Is that some sort of loophole out of this whole corporations having rights thing?

 

[jd4083]

i'd also like to add.... mj doesnt discriminate....it should be for all. even our enemies...haha

so now republicans are our "enemies"? wow...easy to tell who is completely out of touch with reality here

 

[kmk420kali]

im so fucking sick of all this Retardican & Dummycrat bullshit. people wake up !the corperations run everything,between campaign donations and lobbist....
BTW congress just lifted the limit on how much corps can donate to campaigns

I hear you....however, some of those D's & R's agree with you also--
Here is an snip showing that BOTH Parties agree that Regulation on Campaign Contributions is drastically needed--
Notice it was Authored by a Rep and a Dem--

WASHINGTON – Sen. John McCain says the movement he led to reform how political campaigns are financed is dead.
McCain says the Supreme Court has spoken on the constitutionality of political contributions by corporations. The Arizona Republican had sought to regulate them with a landmark campaign finance law he wrote with Sen. Russ Feingold, D-Wis.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100124/ap_on_bi_ge/us_mccain_campaign_finance

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

huh, unions giving really doesn't bother me too much. I have a thing for well organized racketeering. Just kidding. . . kinda.

Yep, corruption is a bad thing on either side.

Are these non-citizen corporations not given citizens' rights then too? Is that some sort of loophole out of this whole corporations having rights thing?

Are you advocating American (citizens) rights for non-American citizens? Do their best interests necessarily coincide with ours?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

so now republicans are our "enemies"? wow...easy to tell who is completely out of touch with reality here

Nah, an individual made a crack about a group that typically disses mj reform. Sensitive peeps take it personal, nothing more.

 

[Kola Radical]

The writing is on the wall and the greedy ass, corrupt, republicans will be the first to suck up to legalization if it means a few more dollars for their children's children. Meanwhile, we barely survive.

Welcome to Babylon

 

[Buddy Guy]

Cheech and Chong.......

Cheech and Chong.......

I'm an old stoner, and have very little respect for these two assholes. These two have been way more damaging to the Mj legalization movement, than any right wing bible thumper. I hope their new comedy tour is something that won't make us all look like dumb ass pot heads who smoke dog shit.

At least Cheech had enough smarts to try and move his career away from the image he and Chong created. I dunno man.......I think they are only out to help themselves again. Fuck 'em both

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

That's an interesting take, BG. I never had the impulse to determine whether humor goes against my principles. If it's funny, I laugh. In a way, comedy has a way of peeling back the layers of misunderstanding and sometimes exposes hypocrisy etc. Sometimes laughing at ourselves is healthy, even if we don't agree with the parallel. IMO, C&C don't make fun of stoners. They make fun of society's perception of stoners. In their movies especially, "the man" is an even bigger buffoon.

The Fox interviewer seemed a little shocked at the idea TC wants to legalize. So TC, being the comedian he is, chastises the preeminent republican broadcaster by (crudely) suggesting he doesn't care whether conservatives want to puff. It's not his desire to convert mj prohibitionists, (typically conservatives) he just wants to legalize.

If the interviewer hadn't mildly guffawed at the concept of legalization, I doubt Chong would have made the comment the way he did. Despite his appearance, Chong has a brain and is capable of using it to point out the obvious, which was the interviewers anticipation and (slight) disapproval, based on her subtle astonishment.

BG, I guess this bolsters your take that Chong might be chastised as opposed to empathetical consideration due to his day job.

Cheech is equally intelligent and quickly jumped on Chong's comment by saying he wanted mj legalized for "everybody" (except kids.) I thought this was just as funny as TC's comment because IMO, Cheech suggested conservatives SHOULD smoke pot, lol. No insult, just funny.

When you have comedians that are just as cerebral as their audience, it's no wonder of the different perceptions taken. Nuance and context is sometimes broader than the spoken word. If we like the speaker, our minds tend to lend these elements. If we don't like the speaker, we tend to take them more literally from verbiage as it's easier to contextualize.

I'm not saying you're opinion is spin, BG. My take (that C&C humor is really a laugh on society) arguably is.

 

[rootfingers]

Are you advocating American (citizens) rights for non-American citizens? Do their best interests necessarily coincide with ours?

Hey DB, I knew I didn't ask that question clearly enough. Real blazed

What I was meaning to convey is a thought that flashed when I read the interpretation you wrote saying corporations that have foreign owners or shareholders wouldn't be able to contribute.

I was thinking that some courts may be pursuaded to enforce this "loophole" of sorts, based on many things. Why this seemed important is the idea that if these corporations that now enjoy the rights of citizens could be proven to have foreign investors (which I'd think most of them do that are publicly traded) would they still be protected behind the ruling that gave them the rights of citizens in the first place? I hope not they would not be, which I think answers the questions you asked me too.

 

[karmasabitch]

Remember sister Mary Elephant? " Class, Class, SHUT UP!!!!!!
Now it should be: Fox, Fox, SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Hey DB, I knew I didn't ask that question clearly enough. Real blazed

What I was meaning to convey is a thought that flashed when I read the interpretation you wrote saying corporations that have foreign owners or shareholders wouldn't be able to contribute.

You're right rf. I assumed the probable argument that hasn't been presented yet, lol.

 

[rootfingers]

You're right in it being probable though and shit I'm an optimist so I'd go so far as to write it down for a representative or three if it seems like they are going the wrong direction on that issue. Couldn't hurt to suggest it, lawyers love shit like that right?

I should probably do some more looking into the whole thing really. never did read those older supreme court rulings.

 

[danimal7]

yeah, my bad ,I misspoke ,it was Scotus, not congress.... just paves the way for more crony capitalism

 

[blinx420]

It's only a matter of time before it's legalized no question about that it's just a matter of when..

I think once the baby boomer gen who grew up knowing MJ as an "evil drug" start two die off an we get the hippie gen into office well start to see most states decriminalize marijuana and then later full legalization