eastern sierra rendezvous reminder!

[matteeanne@yahoo.com]

Actually, I think a number of alcoholics would benefit from smoking the weed. Pretty anyone who become violent on alcohol would be better off smokin the weed. They could get their buzz and instead off becoming mean, the opposite effect would happen. But again, as this started out, what kind of a dimwitted liberal would really believe that societies woes such as addiction can be blamed on the government. As if they are performing some form of mind control on the masses. You know what, I have seen over 10,000 commercials for feminine napkins, but due to my steadfast resolve to not cave to this government conspiracy, I have yet to buy a single box. Well except of course when my wife tells me to go buy some..... Grow up, allow yourself to take resposibility for your own actions, allow the crack whores to do the same, and when a 20 year old kid eats mack truck on his Ninja, give him the same courtesy. Now be a good AMerican and go out and buy an automatic weapon. --- Devon wrote:

> > > willgilmore@... wrote: > > > How many people do you know who are making their > own anti-depresants, > > antibuse, methadon, weenie inflators etc.? > > > > Too, did you ever hear the slogan "alcohol is the > opiate of the > > masses"? No, I haven't either but is sounds like > it fits better than > > religion. > > > > So, fatgreenbike you don't think that lobbiests in > Washington and our > > elected officials don't make deals that support > profit over principal? > > If so, you're living in a different country than I > am. > > It's "bigfatgreenbike", not "fatgreenbike" and don't > you forget it. > > Elected officials very frequently make deals that > support profit over > principal. It's called "corruption", and it's one of > the reasons that a > lot of folks think "politician" is a synonym for > "prostitute". Although > I personally think that selling your body is far > more acceptable morally > than selling your soul. > > But I don't think there is an organized conspiracy > to get people > addicted to alcohol. It sells well enough on its > own, always has. Does > the alcohol industry support the "war on drugs", as > a way to suppress > alternatives to alcohol? I believe so. We have no > real measure of how > harmful marijuana would be until it's in widespread > use like alcohol, > but I believe it can't be any worse. > > Devon > >

_______________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Declare Yourself - Register online to vote today! http://vote.yahoo.com

[Judson D. Jones]

> It's just so much easier to blame someone else rather > than take resposibility for your own actions. Sounds > like something that War hero Kerry might say....

People who gratuitously inject bullshit like this into the discussion shouldn't complain if the thread morphs into political content.

[Pat (M)]

Maybe it's not all that sinister. Age old question heard somewhere: "I can't decide whether we're being led by REALLY smart people who are just putting us on; or by imbeciles who are dead serious." Pat M --- In DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com, WILLAM GILMORE wrote:

> No one mentioned the word "conspiracy" until now. I don't believe

for a moment that the government conspires to do anything -- their too fucking stupid and self-serving for the most part. I do know, however, that accepting major corporate donations in order to win an election makes for a form of symbiosis that requires that politicians not always act in the best interest of the unconnected, non- influential, morons like us.

> > By morons I mean Americans who gauge their success in life by how

well they conform to what advertisers want them to own and our government wants us to believe and support. Give us a smoke, can of brew, a war that we think we're kicking ass in, a pick-up the size of Grants tomb, a Super Walmart and a 7% mortage and we'll elect your ass in a heart beat. Four More Years .... Four More Years .... Four More Years .... same ol bullshit as Vietnam. Where in Washington do you think they'll put the Iraq Wall or some such memorial for this totally unneccessay war?

> > Unneccessary only if oil, armament manufacturing and tactical

support (i.e. Halliburton) isn't at issue. Where they're concerned this little tiff in the Middle East has been a real boon to our ecnomey for years to come. If your company was in any way connected to members of this administration you made a bucket of money these past 3 years.

> > > Devon wrote: > matteeanne@y... wrote: > > >Well, ok, you got me, the Europeans brought it over. > >My point is, you gotta be a real dumbshit to believe > >that THE WORLDS problem with addictive substances is > >part of some big government cover up... > > > Yes, I think the "conspiracy" thing is silly. Advertising does work > pretty well though. Many millions of dollars are poured every day

into

> campaigns designed to influence your perceptions and preferences. > Selling a kid a high powered bike because it will make him feel

powerful

> is no different than selling a 6,000lb "passenger vehicle" because

it

> will make a soccer mom feel safer. > > >It's just so much easier to blame someone else rather > >than take resposibility for your own actions. > > > Welcome to America. Sue anyone today? Day ain't over yet...... > > Devon > > > > List sponsored by Dual Sport News at www.dualsportnews.com. List

FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html

> Unsubscribe by sending a blank message to: > DSN_klr650-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com . > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[WILLAM GILMORE]

I'm convinced it's neither. I believe there are 2 America's - just as there was when our founding fathers decided that the general citizenary couldn't be trusted with the popular vote. They feared that they might vote differently than the elite wished them too -- and the electorial college was born. "Pat (M)" wrote: Maybe it's not all that sinister. Age old question heard somewhere: "I can't decide whether we're being led by REALLY smart people who are just putting us on; or by imbeciles who are dead serious." Pat M --- In DSN_klr650@yahoogroups.com, WILLAM GILMORE wrote:

> No one mentioned the word "conspiracy" until now. I don't believe

for a moment that the government conspires to do anything -- their too fucking stupid and self-serving for the most part. I do know, however, that accepting major corporate donations in order to win an election makes for a form of symbiosis that requires that politicians not always act in the best interest of the unconnected, non- influential, morons like us.

> > By morons I mean Americans who gauge their success in life by how

well they conform to what advertisers want them to own and our government wants us to believe and support. Give us a smoke, can of brew, a war that we think we're kicking ass in, a pick-up the size of Grants tomb, a Super Walmart and a 7% mortage and we'll elect your ass in a heart beat. Four More Years .... Four More Years .... Four More Years .... same ol bullshit as Vietnam. Where in Washington do you think they'll put the Iraq Wall or some such memorial for this totally unneccessay war?

> > Unneccessary only if oil, armament manufacturing and tactical

support (i.e. Halliburton) isn't at issue. Where they're concerned this little tiff in the Middle East has been a real boon to our ecnomey for years to come. If your company was in any way connected to members of this administration you made a bucket of money these past 3 years.

> > > Devon wrote: > matteeanne@y... wrote: > > >Well, ok, you got me, the Europeans brought it over. > >My point is, you gotta be a real dumbshit to believe > >that THE WORLDS problem with addictive substances is > >part of some big government cover up... > > > Yes, I think the "conspiracy" thing is silly. Advertising does work > pretty well though. Many millions of dollars are poured every day

into

> campaigns designed to influence your perceptions and preferences. > Selling a kid a high powered bike because it will make him feel

powerful

> is no different than selling a 6,000lb "passenger vehicle" because

it

> will make a soccer mom feel safer. > > >It's just so much easier to blame someone else rather > >than take resposibility for your own actions. > > > Welcome to America. Sue anyone today? Day ain't over yet...... > > Devon > > > > List sponsored by Dual Sport News at www.dualsportnews.com. List

FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html

> Unsubscribe by sending a blank message to: > DSN_klr650-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com . > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

List sponsored by Dual Sport News at www.dualsportnews.com. List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html Unsubscribe by sending a blank message to: DSN_klr650-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com . Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Lujo Bauer]

When it's some of each that unfortunately has the tendency to confuse the issue. -Lujo Pat (M) wrote:

> Maybe it's not all that sinister. Age old question heard somewhere: > > "I can't decide whether we're being led by REALLY smart people who > are just putting us on; or by imbeciles who are dead serious." >

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Chris]

On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:34:24AM -0700, WILLAM GILMORE wrote:

> Where they're concerned this little tiff in the Middle East has been a real boon to our ecnomey for years to come. If your company was in any way connected to members of this administration you made a bucket of money these past 3 years. >

Blah blah blah. Wars have *always* been economically good for our country. Look at history and most of the major conflicts we have been in have fallen on tail of hard times with a boom to follow. To deny that much of our policy revolves around what's best for our economy would be silly. These decisions have come from both parties too, they each wrap them up a bit differently is all. Sure, gripe and moan because you personally aren't in the defense industry or directly receiving a benefit from this administration. Then when another 'intellectual' like Clinton comes in, the other 85% of the country that don't have a PhD and earn a living off big government and charity organizations can gripe too. Both parties rip *everyone* off, they just do it differently. At least I'd rather be ripped off in the name of private earnings. It's a coin toss and I'd rather see my money buy a Leer jet than housing for someone unwilling to work. Flip a coin and you decide, but puhleeze stop telling someone that one side is better than the other, they both suck and have for years. It's just a matter of how the suction applies to 'your' agenda. I want the Ventura/Schwarzenneger ticket myself, mabe Ted Nugent could run for senate soon too. -- ___ ______ _____ __ ________ ___ / _ |< < / == / ___/__ / /_ /_ __/ / __ ____ _ ___ /__ \ / __ |/ // / ****/ (_ / _ \/ __/ / / / _ \/ // / ' \/ _ \ /__/ /_/ |_/_//_/ == \___/\___/\__/ /_/ /_//_/\_,_/_/_/_/ .__/ (_) 8600 miles*Russel Lines*Supertrapp Race* /_/ http://www.kingsqueak.org/klr650/

[Chris]

On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 12:57:53PM -0700, matteeanne@... wrote:

> Actually, I think a number of alcoholics would benefit > from smoking the weed. Pretty anyone who become > violent on alcohol would be better off smokin the > weed. They could get their buzz and instead off > becoming mean, the opposite effect would happen.

My .02 on why pot isn't legalized. Alcohol and tobacco are rather difficult to produce for your own consumption. They take a great amount of effort to do, with tobacco, it's nearly impossible to do. Pot you can grow in a 6'x6' space, enough to fry an entire family and their neighbors' brains. Do you think for one second that the government would be able to actually reap any tax benefit from legal pot? It would be miniscule. It's all about the taxation, I'm convinced of it. They make more money on the 'war on drugs' than they would ever stand to make if they decriminalized drugs. Remember, *any* politician derives their power from only one thing...the size of their budget. It's not in their interest to stop the billions allocated to 'drug enforcement' and it's unlikely any of that will change until all the WWII generation are long buried. It won't be accepted by voters and the politicians don't stand to profit, thus it will never happen. -- ___ ______ _____ __ ________ ___ / _ |< < / == / ___/__ / /_ /_ __/ / __ ____ _ ___ /__ \ / __ |/ // / ****/ (_ / _ \/ __/ / / / _ \/ // / ' \/ _ \ /__/ /_/ |_/_//_/ == \___/\___/\__/ /_/ /_//_/\_,_/_/_/_/ .__/ (_) 8600 miles*Russel Lines*Supertrapp Race* /_/ http://www.kingsqueak.org/klr650/

[robert bowman]

On Saturday 18 September 2004 04:41, Chris wrote:

> My .02 on why pot isn't legalized. Alcohol and tobacco are rather > difficult to produce for your own consumption. They take a great > amount of effort to do, with tobacco, it's nearly impossible to do.

Biggest problem with alcohol production is the patience to not sample the wares. In the tobacco growing regions, many people used to grow their own.

> Do you think for one second that the government would be able to > actually reap any tax benefit from legal pot? It would be miniscule.

Do you think they would see dime one from alcohol and tobacco without the BATF? You better go rent 'Thunder Road'.

[Chris]

robert bowman wrote:

> On Saturday 18 September 2004 04:41, Chris wrote: > >>My .02 on why pot isn't legalized. Alcohol and tobacco are rather >>difficult to produce for your own consumption. They take a great >>amount of effort to do, with tobacco, it's nearly impossible to do. > > > Biggest problem with alcohol production is the patience to not sample the > wares. In the tobacco growing regions, many people used to grow their own. > > >>Do you think for one second that the government would be able to >>actually reap any tax benefit from legal pot? It would be miniscule. > > > Do you think they would see dime one from alcohol and tobacco without the > BATF? You better go rent 'Thunder Road'.

I don't disagree with you there one bit. My point was just that it takes a considerable effort to make either one palatable on your own. Sure I could make my own bourbon, but the amount of effort to come close to Maker's Mark would be insane. As for tobacco, I think it may be even worse. You need quite a lot of acreage to grow enough, then you need a hanging shed, then you need a flue curing setup, then you need presses and cutters. Not to mention that smoking plain burley (probably the easiest to grow) is pretty nasty and it's extremely difficult to grow any of the nice blending types unless you live in some very narrow climate regions. In comparison, with pot, you simply need a handfull of seeds and somewhere to put them. It will grow almost anywhere and requires no real treatment after the harvest.

[WILLAM GILMORE]

Holy shit! -- they rip us dorks off equally so .... Ted Nugent is the answer? And charity organization are "rip offs" that somehow cater to PhD politicians? And you seem to infer that war is inevitable and that we should just accept it as part of our economy? Finally, all people who need subsidy for housing are unwilling to work? You're thinking is not only wrong headed -- its damn un-American. s wrote:

On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 10:34:24AM -0700, WILLAM GILMORE wrote: > Where they're concerned this little tiff in the Middle East has been a real boon to our ecnomey for years to come. If your company was in any way connected to members of this administration you made a bucket of money these past 3 years. > Blah blah blah. Wars have *always* been economically good for our country. Look at history and most of the major conflicts we have been in have fallen on tail of hard times with a boom to follow. To deny that much of our policy revolves around what's best for our economy would be silly. These decisions have come from both parties too, they each wrap them up a bit differently is all. Sure, gripe and moan because you personally aren't in the defense industry or directly receiving a benefit from this administration. Then when another 'intellectual' like Clinton comes in, the other 85% of the country that don't have a PhD and earn a living off big government and charity organizations can gripe too. Both parties rip *everyone* off, they just do it differently. At least I'd rather be ripped off in the name of private earnings. It's a coin toss and I'd rather see my money buy a Leer jet than housing for someone unwilling to work. Flip a coin and you decide, but puhleeze stop telling someone that one side is better than the other, they both suck and have for years. It's just a matter of how the suction applies to 'your' agenda. I want the Ventura/Schwarzenneger ticket myself, mabe Ted Nugent could run for senate soon too. -- ___ ______ _____ __ ________ ___ / _ |< < / == / ___/__ / /_ /_ __/ / __ ____ _ ___ /__ \ / __ |/ // / ****/ (_ / _ \/ __/ / / / _ \/ // / ' \/ _ \ /__/ /_/ |_/_//_/ == \___/\___/\__/ /_/ /_//_/\_,_/_/_/_/ .__/ (_) 8600 miles*Russel Lines*Supertrapp Race* /_/ http://www.kingsqueak.org/klr650/ List sponsored by Dual Sport News at www.dualsportnews.com. List FAQ courtesy of Chris Krok at: www.bigcee.com/klr650faq.html Unsubscribe by sending a blank message to: DSN_klr650-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com . Yahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]