Quotes of the day
posted at 10:35 pm on February 3, 2009 by Allahpundit
“‘This case is no different than any other case,’ Lott said Monday. ‘This one might be a lot easier since we have photographs of someone using drugs and a partial confession. It’s a relatively easy case once we can determine where the crime occurred.’”
*
“‘So the guy smokes pot,’ Mr. Cohen said. ‘For once I’d like someone to say, ‘Yeah, I smoke pot, it’s harmless and I enjoy it.’’ Instead, he said, Mr. Phelps is lying by pretending he’ll never do it again…
‘The people who should be shaping our kids’ conduct are parents, friends, people they know in the community,’ he said. ‘Michael Phelps’ glory is that he’s an incredibly talented swimmer. Unless your child happens to be a fish, why do you want him to be a role model?’”
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2
I wish I could find a list of misdemeanors. I bet I break more than I realize.
Ampersand on February 4, 2009 at 12:52 AM
And on top of all that, smoking pot will limit you to a mere fourteen Olympic gold medals, a feat that many of the sedentary puritans here have surely rivaled!
paul006 on February 4, 2009 at 12:54 AM
Right, and as I said; you have never misspoke or needed to clarify a position…your position is always, “shaaaadupp and listen, when I’m done talkin you’ll agree with me and if I want your opinion I’ll give it to ya.”
Not an effective debating strategy and I’m not the first to point it out to you; maybe you should take heed.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 12:55 AM
I’m going to have to disagree – since stoners overwhelmingly voted for Uhbama.
18-1 on February 4, 2009 at 12:55 AM
It also makes you go crazy, run around in circles, and jump out of windows. I’ve seen Reefer Madness. I know the facts!
Ampersand on February 4, 2009 at 12:56 AM
I’ve always been amused that the Left was convinced Bush was a cokehead, so “to bring change” they voted in a self admitted cokehead.
18-1 on February 4, 2009 at 12:58 AM
So wait. You’re not only defending a guy’s false statement, but you’re ripping on me for pointing out that it was false?
Might I suggest an effective debating strategy for you? It involves a broomstick, your sphincter, and gravity.
MadisonConservative on February 4, 2009 at 12:59 AM
You don’t need to be an ethicist to be a moral individual and IMO, when it comes to role-models, morality trumps skill.
Darth Executor on February 4, 2009 at 1:02 AM
No, I’m pointing out that after he clarified himself you continued to attack him and refused to acknowledge his point based on the new criteria.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 1:05 AM
Woke up early this morning smoked a roach from the night before
Smoked it down to the cardboard crutch and I was stoned like the night b-4
It was .. oh so sweet
It was .. heavenly
If your ever down on the leeward side pakalolo will tickle your feet
Cruisin thru a town, arrived in the night B-4
I lit up another dubee and it knocked me from door to door
It was .. oh so sweet
It was .. heavenly
If your ever down on the leeward side pakalolo will tickle your feet
Passed by a place called Ewa, didn’t bother to turn around
I put my hand in my pocket, and guess what I found
It was .. oh so sweet
It was .. heavenly
If your ever down on the leeward side pakalolo will tickle your feet
Kini on February 4, 2009 at 1:05 AM
He didn’t clarify anything. He said one thing, then said another, and argued both were true. End of story. Until you’ve managed to funnel two feet of that dowel, I suggest you try a new line of attack.
MadisonConservative on February 4, 2009 at 1:11 AM
Kini on February 4, 2009 at 1:13 AM
Exactly. He never clarified anything. There was never a “What I meant to say was [X], it accidentally came out as [Y]. I apologize.”
And either way, he’s wrong. There are no national laws about public intoxication. Its all up to local governments. And, as I showed, at least one state government says that simply being drunk in public is not a crime, Utah.
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 1:15 AM
Bullsh*t, I watched the entire progression of this conversation and have seen but one thing, you defending your own inability to interact with your opponents with class.
You are saying that he needs to bow down and kiss your ring in order for the discussion to go forward? Is that it? He didn’t say, “oh sorry massah Madison I done misspoke and please don’t lash me for leaving off a frigging adjective.”
Like I said, I aint the first to bring it up, maybe ya’ll should take heed and check yourself.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 1:17 AM
Thanks for the f**king civic lesson junior.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 1:19 AM
Let’s rewind the tape here:
Hmmm, where have I seen an opponent not treating the other side with class….You certainly are quick at breaking your own rules.
Let me summarize the conversation, that you seem to have missed:
So he went straight from “being drunk is illegal” to “public intoxication is a crime” without any “clarification.”
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 1:24 AM
And then you come in, on your white horse, to save the day:
The laws aren’t “subjectively enforced.” There simply are no laws about it in many places. Being disorderly is another story, but having a BAC of a certain level is not a crime in many places.
In no way is it comparable to the nationwide illegality of marijuana, anyway.
Not to mention the fact that MadisonConservative AGREED with the point that Drywall was initially trying to make. You just don’t know how to read.
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 1:28 AM
I’m sorry but that shows me being classless how exactly? And I believe if you can can spell the as teh in an Internet discussion one can be forgiven for the literary lapse of missing an adjective.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 1:29 AM
Let the brother smoke his bong.
Tzetzes on February 4, 2009 at 1:29 AM
You said this:
To which I responded with this:
You never admitted you were wrong when you said only Montana has those laws. Funny, you never even mentioned it again.
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 1:30 AM
Absolutely. See, when I say “No, you’re wrong”, what I’m really saying is “Kiss my ring, serf”. No wonder you’re defending Dave being wrong the first time. Apparently, you’re telepathic, and knew he meant something else entirely when he typed it! Too bad you couldn’t transmit back a message saying “Hey, maybe it would be best if you don’t make a straightforward, clearly understandable assertion that’s as full of holy f’ing fail as I am!” or even “Hmmm, if I goof this up, maybe I should admit the mistake, rather than pretend the first crock of koala dung I managed to bang out on my drool-filled keyboard wasn’t actually the result of a stroke!”
I’m figuring you should be able to sit without a chair if you’re making good progress on that wooden pole. Please make yourself comfortable.
MadisonConservative on February 4, 2009 at 1:30 AM
Yes, generally condescension (“junior”) and profanity are tell-tale signs of a lack of class.
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 1:32 AM
see also:
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 1:35 AM
Well, I must admit, the current hair-splitting turned sour argument certainly wasn’t the hair-splitting argument I expected in a thread about drug use and ethical implications.
I’d give it an “A” for effort if it all wasn’t so incredibly moot.
Weebork on February 4, 2009 at 1:40 AM
Madison, I usually have the utmost respect for you and I appreciate your contribution to most discussions but your inability to see an argument through objectively and your need to acquire your daily testosterone fix from verbally abusing you opponents is borderline pathological.
Considering your desired treatment of pot users in the last thread my admonition is mild in comparison and I see no use of profanity cited in your arguement against me.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 1:42 AM
Eh, we’ve had half a dozen comment threads in the last week to discuss the ins and outs of why marijuana sucks and doesn’t. We need some all-out brawling.
MadisonConservative on February 4, 2009 at 1:43 AM
MadisonConservative
Oh I missed the real fireworks already? That’s what I get for spending 60 hours at school. Stupid grades. Bah.
Weebork on February 4, 2009 at 1:45 AM
That’s great. I don’t know who you are, nor care as long as you willfully ignore the intellectual dishonesty of others.
MadisonConservative on February 4, 2009 at 1:45 AM
Ain’t worth it. All my bachelor’s of science got me was several months of unemployment followed by a job I could have gotten with a $200 certification and a snazzier resume.
MadisonConservative on February 4, 2009 at 1:47 AM
Well I’ll be sure to point out yours at every opportunity, just keep in mind to cross your t’s and all that.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 1:48 AM
But a degree in Physics is a real science degree :-p
And cheer up, it could have been worse. You could have spent all those years getting a communication degree AND unemployed. :)
Weebork on February 4, 2009 at 1:48 AM
That some posters are concerned about this and want action taken says more about them that it does about Phelps. I will continue to take every step to make sure that my children do not go down a path to idolize “celebrities”, who as humans, are bound to make mistakes. I consider it my job as a parent to guide my children to avoid “idol worshipping”. As a child, I found certain pop stars attractive, however, if they shaved their heads, I knew it would be stupid if I followed suit.
If Phelps continues to perform & succeed at the level he has in the past, this act will be meaningless, if he becomes a screwup, it’ll be considered the cause behind his failure (even if it has absolutely no correlation).
Now, I must get back to my wine.
Security Mom on February 4, 2009 at 1:51 AM
I’m not sure what you meant by my “desired treatment.” I don’t recall saying pot users should be treated any certain way. I want the law to be enforced so long as it is indeed the law, but that’s about it. If that includes the dumb laws, then so be it. And even if I was classless in whatever it is that I said, you’re still the one who claimed that you are disappointed that MadCon can’t conduct himself in a classier manner, a standard to which you don’t even hold yourself to, so long as you’re arguing against someone you deem to have less class than yourself (meaning me, apparently.)
As for profanity,
See, I’m under the assumption that “f**king” stands for a swear word. But I guess I should clarify that, before you get confused.
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 1:52 AM
So is a Business degree, Newton. Bet I got laid more.
MadisonConservative on February 4, 2009 at 1:55 AM
Yeah……………
……………………… not so bright.
Seven Percent Solution on February 4, 2009 at 2:03 AM
I am pretty sure he was not smoking it training for the olympics as it would have slowed his reaction time. To swim fast however you don’t need a lot of brain power – fish do it all the time.
Poptech on February 4, 2009 at 2:08 AM
I stand corrected you clueless f**king id*ot; I forgot that an inference to profanity was equal to a bonafide usage of a term. Maybe Drywall should have used asterisks in his follow up responses and cited his mistake by cross referencing each and every response and meriting their veracity on a point by point basis.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 2:08 AM
Why do you expect “respectful” responses from Madison when you continually spit out posts like this? What right do you have to question the manner with which he addresses you? You certainly haven’t earned it.
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 2:17 AM
And please, for once, answer a question:
What is this “desired treatment” of potheads that you claim I advocated for?
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 2:19 AM
I only used disrespectful terms concerning you, and you certainly did earn them.
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 2:19 AM
Yet you still haven’t given me one single example of my “desired treatment” of potheads which you claim is behind your decision to treat me like dirt.
jimmy the notable on February 4, 2009 at 2:28 AM
Aw, gosh!!!!
I got bong juice on my shirt….!!!!!
Kini on February 4, 2009 at 2:29 AM
Sorry needed to shower before bed…
Unnoticeable:
At 3 in the morning I’m not about to rehash or cite your ridiculous positions from the conversations you engaged in today; you openly supported the current Federal and State laws regarding cannabis use and therefore are deserving of the derisions I heap on you.
Anyone who supports the current draconian enforcement regime while citing the laxness of public drunkenness laws deserves the label of hypocrite scum – one good turn deserves another; right boozer?
Ciannaky on February 4, 2009 at 3:13 AM
I guess this explains the consumption of mass quantities of food.
elifino on February 4, 2009 at 5:02 AM
Unless Obamas people have fixed this little niggling constitutional thingy, you still cannot be compelled to testify against yourself.
Besides is Michael SURE that was pot?
Lonetown on February 4, 2009 at 5:21 AM
Pfft. In some parts of Louisiana, it’s mandatory.
Actally, I think you’re confusing public intoxication, with “drunk & disorderly”.
Or do Canadians automatically assign lawlessness to inebriation?
soundingboard on February 4, 2009 at 5:44 AM
Oh boy, another hero for the pot heads. “Yeah, well, Michael Phelps smokes dope and he’s won more gold medals than you…and, and…he was probably stoned when he did it.”
Your mommas must be so proud.
SKYFOX on February 4, 2009 at 5:44 AM
If that would have been a beer bong he would’ve gotten a Miller Beer endorsement contract.
Wait…He’s a bud man.
soundingboard on February 4, 2009 at 6:20 AM
I want the law to be enforced so long as it is indeed the law, but that’s about it. If that includes the dumb laws, then so be it.
soundingboard on February 4, 2009 at 6:25 AM
damn. screwed the tags on that one.
last time i’m havin’ whiskey for breakfast.
soundingboard on February 4, 2009 at 6:30 AM
I don’t see how they could charge him with anything.
It wasn’t his pot. He was at a party and someone handed him a bong. So he took a hit. Big deal. The law doesn’t say you can’t take a hit.
Where is the crime?
Posession is a crime, selling it is a crime, but the act of smoking it at someone’s residence is not illegal.
Mr Purple on February 4, 2009 at 7:31 AM
Phelps should have just used the R. Kelley defense in regards to the photo: “That ain’t me….”
Drugs will be legalized across the board within two years. The REAL war on the Mexican border will make sure of it. Mexico is becoming a Narco-state, and the cartels are winning. Prohibition didn’t work, only making Capone type figures possible. The Zetas are far worse than anything Chicago experienced in the ’20′s. Drugs adhere to the laws of supply and demand like any other commodity. The demand in the U.S. is astronomical, regardless of “numbers” the government comes up with. Phelps was just engaging in behavior doctors,lawyers,Presidents engage in but are hypocritical about. Oh, the humanity…………
adamsmith on February 4, 2009 at 7:38 AM
Aside from the weed argument, I find myself for only the second time in this century “completely” agreeing with Dave. (I think his kid sister must hop on the keyboard every once in a while when he takes the garbage out for Mom)
But yeah, I’ve told my daughter many times when she got pop-starry eyed over teen idol types that they always seem to disappoint and remember what’s important in life. I’ve always tried to make her see people should get second chances in her eyes because nobodies perfect.
Point out positive role models you see for them to consider also. Lot’s of accomplished and important female NCOs and Officers in my unit I made a point to have my kid meet.
hawkdriver on February 4, 2009 at 7:44 AM
What a nit picking shit show this topic has become.
That people are caught up in drunk vs public intoxication vs which states have laws vs which states don’t is amazingly obtuse.
My only point was it’s hypocritical to shriek pot is illegal and that’s the end of the story, when state by state it has just as many legal grey areas dealing with its use/abuse as alcohol.
Then yahoos claim pot is bad for your health as if alcohol isn’t.
Perhaps people should give more of a shit about the billions and billions of dollars lost in productivity by hungover people who underperfom or don’t show up for work and less of a shit about a young adult celebrating with a bong hit rather than a beer funnel.
Dave Rywall on February 4, 2009 at 8:00 AM
Oh, indeed. That was my point. When I quoted the guy who said that only kids who were fish should be disappointed by what Phelps did, I was trying to point out the insidious idea that someone’s success and failing can only be appreciated or shamed by those in the same field as the person who either succeeded or failed. The things that make Phelps worthy of admiration are the things demonstrated outside the pool: sacrifice, determination, focus, clarity, honor (following the rules of the sport), discipline, etc. These things have nothing to do with swimming, and can be celebrated by all men. Likewise any deficiency in these areas, if large enough and public enough, are open to the possibility of being shamed by all men. Without this reality, all of literature would become mute to us. Only to fictitious Greek men would Odysseus be celebrated.
Weight of Glory on February 4, 2009 at 8:33 AM
Hey, Sheriff. Obama fessed up to snortin’ coke. Are you gonna arrest him, too?
locomotivebreath1901 on February 4, 2009 at 8:41 AM
Pot is a gateway drug……ruining many lives…
He is an anomaly in that he can swim….he is splashed all over the media that young men and women live by..
No wonder this country is sliding into the dark ages…
frizzbee on February 4, 2009 at 8:51 AM
No you didn’t. Or if you did, how did you know I was going to read your comment in the future, since this is the first time I visited the thread?
It’s bad enough Hot Air lets another poster use my handle…let’s not be ‘imprecise’ and conflate other James-based handles with mine (and the other guy’s).
James on February 4, 2009 at 9:31 AM
Did he possess MJ? Yes, he did. It doesn’t matter that it belonged to someone else or that the possession was for a brief period of time. When he grabbed the bong, he was in possession of the alleged MJ.
Can he be prosecuted? No, he can’t.
One, you have no substantial and credible evidence that it was MJ. Hearsay or lay opinion is not good evidence. You would need a criminalist to testily that he tested the evidence and it was positive for thc.
Two, the corupus delicti rule, i.e., one cannot use a confession or admission if you can’t prove a crime was even committed.
Thre, it is irresponsible for this sheriff to be shooting his mouth off the way he is.
Blake on February 4, 2009 at 9:43 AM
Smoke up Mikey! Put those lungs to some good use. I don’t give a shit how fast you can waggle up and down a pool….if you can suck down an 1/8th of sticky bud in one hit, then you’re a true champ.
LimeyGeek on February 4, 2009 at 10:13 AM
Drywall is the great uniter.
I get annoyed that the “legalize it” crowd is so quick to assume that just because Phelps was caught with a bong in his hand at a party that he’s a regular smoker or that he ever smoked before the last Olympics.
If you really want a hero for pot smoke, try someone who’s actually admitted to smoking.
Come on. This is really not the same. Dave made a mistake and instead of clarifying, he pretended as though he never made the mistake. If I don’t cross a t (assuming that’s possible online), and you call me on it, then I’ll admit it. It’s really that simple.
Your persistence here seems to be more about Madison than anything else. Yes, Madison can be abrasive. That’s who he is. You can’t think you’ll change that by pointing it out during a heated discussion in the middle of the night.
Seriously? You don’t think that sh!t is the same as shit? Some people star out a letter or two just so that it doesn’t get moderated, not to avoid cussing. But make no mistake, when you write f**king, people are going to read the word with the two letters out, because that’s what you’re communicating when you write that.
Esthier on February 4, 2009 at 11:12 AM
/shrug
I just can’t get in a huff (puff?) over an adult smoking up from time to time. Yes, it is illegal. Yes, it is not good for you. No, I don’t think it’s a good idea for a non-adult to do it, ever. No, I don’t think it’s a good thing to do all the time. No, I don’t smoke.
spmat on February 4, 2009 at 12:33 PM
Hey! You forgot to mention that POT also makes you play the piano REALLY REALLY fast!
See. That stuff has already screwed up your memory!
oldleprechaun on February 4, 2009 at 12:34 PM
I’ve emailed every sponsor he has and demanded they drop him. Poor role model for kids around the world. Who want’s to look at a Wheaties box or eat a Subway sub and think pot?
wepeople on February 4, 2009 at 1:10 PM
Anorexics?
Esthier on February 4, 2009 at 2:03 PM
So…you’re saying I didn’t agree with you?
hawkdriver on February 4, 2009 at 2:11 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2