No stems or seeds that you don’t need, Acapulco Gold is bad-*ss weeeeeeeed.

Now that would be worth arresting him for.

thedailyconservative on February 16, 2009 at 11:45 PM

As of right now, booze is legal, pot isn’t. You don’t like the laws, instead of sitting around getting high, go have the Boston Pot Party and get it legalized. Until then, shut up.
I don’t care what Phelps does. I just don’t want his celebrity status protecting him when he breaks the law, no mattter how stupid the law may or may not be. And no, I don’t give a flying **ck how many medals he won. He wants to **ss away his career, that’s his problem. He screws up, he can burn for it like the peasants do.

The new rally cry is ‘smoke one for the swimmer!’

Unbelieveable.

I despise drugs…now. They stunted my maturity for about 10 years. Years I’ll never get back, but I grew out of them.

not that I care… smoke ‘em if you go ‘em…

Come on up here to Vancouver, Canada. There hasn’t been a simple possession conviction here for decades. We have our priorities straight, i.e. healthcare and a civil society.

Don’t worry about the Chinese, just get away from that fascist hillbilly sheriff!

So during prohibition I guess everyone who took a drink should have apologized publicly? You make a classic mistake of assuming that every law that is on the books is “right” and if one breaks them they are “wrong”. The fact that the government overreaches so much in the failed war on drugs, and that marijuana is classified the same as heroin, is ridiculous.

Consider this a lecture from the USA.

Nothing wrong with him apologizing for doing something illegal. Period.

watson007 on February 16, 2009 at 7:37 PM

He no more owes anyone an apology for taking a hit off of a bong than you do for getting a parking ticket. Christ…

Shame on him for doing this.

Shame on him for apologizing for doing something wrong? What the hell is wrong with that? What the Chinese did (or didn’t do) is their problem.

Nothing wrong with him apologizing for doing something illegal. Period.

Many would have argued the same thing of “gay” but at the end of the day, it really doesn’t matter.

Esthier on February 16, 2009 at 6:31 PM

Yes, many can argue that the meaning of words lose or change their meaning but arguing that gay now means homosexual (which almost everyone accepts as a matter of course) does not rise to the same level as purposefully confusing distinct political ideologies for no good reason. It would be incumbent on any conservative to be wary of this kind of obfuscation as it largely serves the interests of the totalitarians themselves.

I’d argue that it hasn’t really changed just that it is now being misapplied and misused.

Many would have argued the same thing of “gay” but at the end of the day, it really doesn’t matter.

Why? Once again, the word’s meaning has changed. It’s history is irrelevant to that.

Esthier on February 16, 2009 at 6:21 PM

I’d argue that it hasn’t really changed just that it is now being misapplied and misused. In last the year or two newspapers have begun spelling “Communism” as “communism” which is very sinister. If we’re going to accept that words – linguistic concepts – can suddenly change horses in mid-stream then we’d also have to retire the phrase “Orwellian” or change its meaning to something else.

Gay used to just mean happy, but don’t get upset when others use the word to indicate a fondness for same sex relationships.

There are certain areas in which I can admit defeat. Homosexuals are called “gay” for the most part. Fair enough. Britain and Ireland are considered officialy a part of “Europe”. They aren’t – Europe is a Continent – though they are a part of the heritage of European Christian civillisation being islands so close to the mainland.

Fascism as a word and as a concept is misapplied because liberals and for the most part conservatives do not want to state baldly that Islam is an enemy of the West. In which case does anyone listen to what Geert Wilders actually says? He posits that Islamic injunctions to kill infidels come from the Koran and Mohammed and Fitna presents his case very convincingly.

I’d recommend you read this article by Paul Gottfried, Heil Hillary?, for starters.

aengus on February 16, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Why? Once again, the word’s meaning has changed. It’s history is irrelevant to that.

Most people are out of college by the time they are 23….he’s not a kid anymore.

jimmy the notable on February 16, 2009 at 5:34 PM

Just because you’re out of college doesn’t make you mature, smart, or world-wise. If it did, there would be less young democrats.

Hey I’m glad he got off and can get back to normal life without this hanging over him. I just don’t blame the Sheriff for launching an investigation in the first place.

aengus on February 16, 2009 at 5:37 PM

Under our laws, there is no way in hell he could prove the case in court. It was an abuse of power for he sheriff to behave the way he did.