Quotes of the day

posted at 10:41 pm on January 23, 2014 by Allahpundit

Texas Gov. Rick Perry signaled Thursday that he’s for the decriminalization of marijuana use — not legalization, but the softening of punishment for pot users in the border state.

“As governor, I have begun to implement policies that start us toward a decriminalization” by introducing alternative “drug courts” that provide treatment and softer penalties for minor offenses, Perry said during an international panel on drug legalization at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland…

“Legalization is no penalty at all, where as decriminalization doesn’t necessarily mean jail time (for minor possession offenses.) It means more of a fine or counseling or some sort of program where you don’t end up in jail but in a rehabilitative program,” said Lucy Nashed, a spokeswoman for Perry.

“The goal is to keep people out of jails and reduce recidivism, that kind of thing,” she said, adding that decriminalization excludes violent offenders and dealers.

***

We tolerate drinking because most adults use alcohol responsibly, and by all means let’s have a debate about cannabis given how much of the country has already legalized it under the false flag of “medical” marijuana. But an honest debate would not whitewash pot’s risks.

A growing body of medical research shows that the psychoactive substance in marijuana may cause permanent cognitive damage when used by adolescents, such as impaired memory and learning. The drug can trigger psychotic episodes, especially among vulnerable late adolescents, and the price decreases and social normalization of recreational use will increase the number of underage potheads…

Very few people are incarcerated for simple possession, which makes up about 88% of arrests. There are currently about 40,000 state and federal prisoners serving time for marijuana-related convictions, and most have violent criminal histories. Most judges must be persuaded that someone is a true danger to society to sentence prison for mere drug use.

Mr. Obama is also kidding himself if he thinks drug legalization will be a boon to the poor. His own history of drug use is well known, but most users aren’t the privileged students of the Punahou School. Like all human vices, the misery of addiction is always worse for those who lack the resources and family support of the affluent.

***

Former Rep. Patrick Kennedy says President Barack Obama is wrong about the dangers of marijuana, saying that the drug today is not like what the president smoked in his youth

“I think the president needs to speak to his NIH director in charge of drug abuse,” Kennedy said on MSNBC’s “Hardball” on Monday night. “[She] would tell the president that, in fact, today’s modern, genetically modified marijuana, so it’s much higher THC levels, far surpass the marijuana that the president acknowledges smoking when he was a young person.”…

“I mean, if the president feels alcohol is worse than tobacco, what’s he prepared to do? And I’ll tell you, the president won’t be able to do a thing,” Kennedy said. “Why? Because alcohol is too powerful an industry to change. And right now, we have a chance to stop another for-profit industry from targeting our public health.”

***

“We will end the failed war on drugs,” [Chris Christie] said, “that believes that incarceration is the cure of every ill caused by drug abuse. We will make drug treatment available to as many of our non-violent offenders as we can, and we will partner with our citizens to create a society that understands that every life has value and no life is disposable.” That is revolutionary stuff — and will be no mean feat to accomplish…

Many on the right, not least of them the editors of this magazine, have been arguing for decades that the war on drugs is a failure — National Review’s 1996 symposium on the issue was headlined “The War on Drugs Is Lost” — but despite the strength of the evidence and the moral weight of the argument, ending drug prohibition is a position that has for decades failed to gain much traction in the mainstream political debate. There has been some incremental liberalization when it comes to marijuana, but Christie’s promise is considerably more broad. Those who labor in think-tank obscurity often despair of their ideas’ ever entering general political circulation; Christie’s promise is a reminder that, though it may take years or decades, ideas matter.

Drug addiction is an unalloyed evil, a destroyer of lives and families, an invitation to unemployment, poverty, disease, and in many cases an early death. But not every evil is a matter for the police and the prisons; in the matter of drug abuse and addiction, it has taken our nation a tragically, even catastrophically, long time to begin to figure that out. Many people will dabble in drugs without ever becoming addicts, and many of those who are arrested on drug charges suffer far more from their criminal histories than they ever do from the drugs. The war on drugs has filled our prisons and contributed to the scandalous conditions therein, which should be a source of deep and abiding shame for any decent and patriotic American. There are some horrible and evil people in our prisons, but no human being deserves the treatment — from casual brutality to constant rape — meted out there.

***

The very same year, for example, that Colorado legalized marijuana, the Colorado Senate passed (without a single Republican vote) a ban on trans fats in schools. Are we to believe eating a glazed donut is more harmful than smoking a joint? California has already banned trans fats in restaurants statewide, but now is on the brink of legalizing marijuana statewide come November. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg supported New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s effort to decriminalize marijuana in New York State, while at the same time supporting a ban on extra-large sodas. A 32-ounce Mountain Dew is bad for you, but pot isn’t?

The logic is dumbfounding. For many years, health-conscious liberals have waged a deafening, public war against cigarettes. Smoking bans in public places like restaurants and bars have been enacted in states all over the country. Recently, New York City, New Jersey and several other cities and states have extended those bans to include the newest tobacco fad—e-cigarettes. Yet, when it comes to smoking marijuana? Crickets…

Unless you’re smoking something, the logic here is pretty strong. So what explains why liberals target unhealthy foods, yet turn a blind eye to a far more harmful substance? The answer is not clear, and there may not be a good answer at all. Perhaps marijuana advocates will say that they’re merely bowing to the reality that millions of Americans enjoy it despite its deleterious health effects. But the same could be said for trans fats. Rather than speculate, we should hold liberals accountable and demand that they answer publicly: If trans fats, GMOs and other dangerous substances deserve to be banned in the name of public health, then why not marijuana as well?

***

Now that the War on Drugs seems to be winding down — and it’s about time — we’re going to hear more about the benign effects of smoking pot when compared to the hazards of consuming alcohol. This is a longstanding talking point for legalization advocates — and for many people a handy justification to sign on to the cause. For others, it’s a way to create an equivalence between one of man’s greatest innovations and what amounts to a big waste of time…

Fortunately, we don’t drink for our health, only to it – though there are a number of studies that allege moderate intake of alcohol can be beneficial (and I choose to believe every single one of them). The social value of alcohol is immeasurable, whereas the social value of pot is negligible. Alcohol, in its countless variations, flavors, and uses, has widespread prevalence in in our rituals and social lives for a good reason.

Marijuana might have analgesic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-psychotic properties, and it may provide a fulfilling personal experience, generating euphoria or heightened sensations (also anxiety and paranoia), and chances are high nothing averse will happen if you smoke up when you’re young. But it’s doubtful you’ll ever be clinking bongs at a wedding or setting aside the Scotch to drown your sorrows with family members over a joint. That’s not only because of the stigma. Alcohol, which can be consumed, unlike pot, for the taste alone, often makes life more accessible, you more likeable, and others more bearable.

***

***

***

Via RCP.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 3 4 5

The GOPe are jerks. Conservatives saved them by opposing Obamacare – they would have compromised – and now they want the spoils from that.

kcewa on January 24, 2014 at 6:36 AM

kcewa on January 24, 2014 at 6:36 AM

now they are getting ready for amnesty…

cmsinaz on January 24, 2014 at 6:41 AM

now they are getting ready for amnesty…

cmsinaz on January 24, 2014 at 6:41 AM

SAN ANTONIO — The same House Republicans who punted on immigration last year are now privately crafting an intricate plan to try to pass it in 2014.
Most people close to the planning expect votes on four bills by the end of the summer, including one that would give undocumented workers legal status.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2014/01/comprehensive-immigration-reform-republicans-gop-agenda-102537.html#ixzz2rJc8j4VT

kcewa on January 24, 2014 at 6:44 AM

kcewa on January 24, 2014 at 6:44 AM

arrrgghh

cmsinaz on January 24, 2014 at 6:48 AM

Wow! No Christie love in the QOTD last night? Well pot is a good reliable stand-by too.

we’ll be hearing more war on women meme when hillary starts to run….evil gop being mean to poor little hillary….

cmsinaz on January 24, 2014 at 6:23 AM

I don’t know if that will work this time. You can’t stand as some sort of strong accomplished leader at the same time you and your minions are whining that you can’t stand up for criticism.

I go on the record, again, saying that I don’t think Killary will ultimately run. She’s like the sacrificial zinc nodes they install on ships and oil rigs. A metal to absorb all the corrosion to protect the steel of the actual object.

That’s right, I’m calling Killary a sacrificial node.

Happy Nomad on January 24, 2014 at 6:52 AM

Happy Nomad on January 24, 2014 at 6:52 AM

I hear ya but they won’t see it that way….the lsm will make sure to vilify anyone who criticizes hillary HN….

cmsinaz on January 24, 2014 at 6:55 AM

Good Morning, Patriots! And, Trolls

Rebels Without a Clue.

My take: From Child Stars to Train Wrecks…What Happened? (A KJ Rant…Err…Analysis)

kingsjester on January 24, 2014 at 6:56 AM

My take: From Child Stars to Train Wrecks…What Happened? (A KJ Rant…Err…Analysis)

kingsjester on January 24, 2014 at 6:56 AM

At least when it comes to child “stars” like Beiber or Miley Cyrus, I think there is a difference. “Stars” who are part of a group have others around them having the same experience have some grounding in a world that is far from normal. But when you’re a single packaged product who (at the age of 13) is the sole breadwinner for your family and the employer of many others….. I hear that train a’comin’

Happy Nomad on January 24, 2014 at 7:07 AM

I hear ya but they won’t see it that way….the lsm will make sure to vilify anyone who criticizes hillary HN….

cmsinaz on January 24, 2014 at 6:55 AM

True but that would be true no matter what. All I’m saying is that Hillary has managed to rub off most of that sheen as the “smartest woman in the universe” nonsense that she carefully crafted during her time as First Lady and carpetbagging Senator. The criticism, so long as it isn’t personal, simply will not resonate as it did before Killary took over as SecState.

Happy Nomad on January 24, 2014 at 7:10 AM

Good point HN

cmsinaz on January 24, 2014 at 7:15 AM

Here’s a relevant excerpt from a comment from ajasksonian several months ago:

Our current drug problems don’t stem from the 1930′s but in a shift in viewpoint that laws are used to punish bad behavior (a negative form of moralism of just restricting the bad) to one of creating a positive moral environment via restricting citizens from freely choosing to live as they please. The problem with such attempts at social control is that once they become political there is a shift in viewpoint in politics from being a necessary, if not pleasant job, to one of position advocacy via law. The moral good of government stopping immoral behavior that is liberty threatening to others is clouded with the idea that government can be the source of positive morality (thus stepping beyond the civil realm of law and into natural and moral law, where it has no jurisdiction). Prohibiting people from doing bad things with anything is a highly problematic concept as it can easily tread on liberty and freedom of the innocent in its pursuit. When you are to do good through coercion, then the doing of the good is no longer a good in and of itself due to the coercion involved. Thus a necessary evil (government) becomes a pure evil (an authoritarian State).

Progressivism took root in the realm of using the power of the State to create a morally positive atmosphere by punishing anything that politicians disliked and then pushing things they did. To see where that starts in a serious way one needs to look at the Temperance to Prohibition movement and then the Shanghai International Conference on the opium trade, and to remember that Progressivism (way back when) wasn’t a product of Marx (ex. labor unions, labor strife, atheism and hatred of capitalism) but contained a very strong current of mainstream religious organizations. Today’s anti-religious, anti-liberty Left begins with the very moral organizations seeking to increase Temperance, which is a moral good if done via free choice. I count as their greatest success the food and drug purity laws… the rest I can say is a very mixed bag, indeed.

anotherJoe on January 24, 2014 at 7:16 AM

What a country!

We graduate basketball players from our top universities who cannot read the written word.

Meantime stoners have penetrated the dna of marijuana and made it an awesome psychoactive compound.

Boy those dumb stoners.

Lonetown on January 24, 2014 at 7:32 AM

The chick exhaling the pot smoke in the picture on the front page is hot.

That’s all I really have to say.

DRayRaven on January 24, 2014 at 7:57 AM

I’m an AMERICAN woman. I am NOT a Jewish-British-Scandinavian-American woman. My son is not(gotta think for a sec) British-German-Jewish-American Indian-Scandinavian guy. It doesn’t matter as much where we came from- as it matters that now we’re here. Americans. No hyphens. Not victims chained to our past racial/ ethnic slights.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 24, 2014 at 1:49 AM

So says the woman who has a tendency to start off her comments by stating:
As a Texan…
As a someone who use to live in Chicago…
As an Aspie…
As someone with an eating disorder…
As a Jew…
As a Catholic…
As a right to moderate conservative…

It’s hard to have any validity to bitch about someone hyphenating themselves when you do it all the time depending on which way the wind blows.

mizflame98 on January 24, 2014 at 8:38 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=njYrqp7oZ7I

Derek Trucks Band: Lets go get stoned.

svs22422 on January 24, 2014 at 9:04 AM

Report of the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse

Marihuana: A Signal of Misunderstanding

Commissioned by President Richard M. Nixon, March, 1972

——————————————————————————–

Table of Contents

The Report

Letter of Transmittal

Introduction

I. Marihuana and the Problem of Marihuana
•Origins of the Marihuana Problem •Visibility
•Perceived Threats
•Symbolism

•The Need for Perspective •Historical Perspective
•Cultural Perspective •The Search for Meaning
•Skepticism
•The Limits of Rationality

•Formulating Marihuana Policy •Scientific Oversimplification
•Philosophical Oversimplification
•Sociological Oversimplification
•Legal Oversimplification

•The Report

II. Marihuana Use and Its Effects
•The Marihuana User
•Demographic Characteristics
•Patterns of Use
•Profiles of Users •Experimental Users
•Intermittent Users
•Moderate and Heavy Users
•Very Heavy Users

•Becoming a Marihuana User •Parental Influence
•Situational Factors and Behavioral Correlates
•Social Group Factors
•The Dynamics of Persistent Use

•Becoming a Multidrug User •Epidemiologic Studies
•Profiles and Dynamics
•Sociocultural Factors

•Effects of Marihuana on the User
•Botany and Chemistry
•Factors Influencing Drug Effect •Dosage
•Method of Use
•Metabolism
•Set and Setting
•Tolerance
•Reverse Tolerance
•Duration of Use
•Patterns of Use
•Definition of Dependence

•Effects Related to Pattern Use
•Immediate Drug Effects •Subjective Effects
•Bodv Function
•Mental Function
•The Intoxicated State
•Unpleasant Reactions
•Anxiety States
•Psychosis
•Conclusions

•ShortTerm Effects
•Long Term Effects
•Very Long Term Effects •Tolerance and Dependence
•General Body Function
•Social Functioning
•Mental Functioning
•Motivation and Behavioral Change

•Summary

III. Social Impact of Marihuana Use
•Marihuana and Public Safety •Marihuana and Crime
•The Issue of Cause and Effect •Marihuana and Violent Crime
•Marihuana and Non Violent Crime
•A Sociocultural Explanation

•Marihuana and Driving

•Marihuana, Public Health and Welfare •A Public Health Approach •The Population at Risk
•Confusion and Fact

•Assessment of Perceived Risks •Lethality
•Potential for Genetic Damage
•Immediate Effects
•Effects of LongTerm, Heavy Use
•Addiction Potential
•Progression to Other Drugs

•Preventive Public Health Concerns •Summary

•Marihuana and the Dominant Social Order •Marihuana and the Dominant Social Order •The Adult Marihuana User
•The Young Marihuana User

•The World of Youth
•Why Society Feels Threatened •Dropping Out
•Dropping Down
•Youth and Radical Politics
•Youth and the Work Ethic
•The Changing Social Scene

IV. Social Response to Marihuana Use
•The Initial Social Response
•The Change
•The Current Response •The Criminal Justice System •Law Enforcement Behavior
•Law Enforcement Opinion

•The Non-Legal Institutions •The Family
•The Schools
•The Churches
•The Medical Community
•Summary

•The Public Response

V. Marihuana and Social Policy
•Drugs in a Free Society •Drugs and Social Responsibility

•A Social Control Policy for Marihuana •Approval of Use
•Elimination of Use
•Discouragement or Neutrality

•Implementing the Discouragement Policy •The Role of Law in Effective Social Control
•Total Prohibition
•Regulation
•Partial Prohibition
•Recommendations for Federal Law
•Recommendations for State Law
•Discussion of Federal Recommendations
•Discussion of State Recommendations
•Discussion of Potential Objections

•A Final Comment

Iowa Medical Marijuana 2014

svs22422 on January 24, 2014 at 9:17 AM

mizflame98 on January 24, 2014 at 8:38 AM

The only time you show up here is to bitch at me.
I get it-conservative women like to eat their own.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 24, 2014 at 9:38 AM

I’m an AMERICAN woman. I am NOT a Jewish-British-Scandinavian-American woman. annoyinglittletwerp on January 24, 2014 at 1:49 AM

Then how come in 99.4% of your comments you mention you’re Jewish?

Akzed on January 24, 2014 at 9:38 AM

The term ‘African-American’ really gets in my craw.
Africa’s a continent-not a race.
*Not jumping on you.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 24, 2014 at 1:13 AM
.

As the kids said when I was growing up. Well, A-DOY!

African American marks people whose lines of descent trace back to the African continent.

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 1:32 AM

.
There is NO validity/legitimacy in requesting or demanding that your “ethnic origins” be recognized “up-front and center”, within everyday political terminology.

It’s only done to claim “special status” for a ‘victimized demographic’.
Another way of putting it; “redistribution of political influence.”

To HELL … with ‘hyphenated-American’ terminology.

I also include using the term “native-American” in this debate, as well.

listens2glenn on January 24, 2014 at 1:57 AM

.
Well, . . . . . . . . apparently I’m still waiting for libfree’ (or anyone else) to reply to this comment.

Did someone post a reply, that I ‘overlooked’?

listens2glenn on January 24, 2014 at 9:44 AM

Then how come in 99.4% of your comments you mention you’re Jewish?

Akzed on January 24, 2014 at 9:38 AM

Ooop! #snatched

ALT proved herself quite the moron in that entire exchange. And also, apparently she’s rude as hell to strangers and acquaintances. No basic home training.

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 10:04 AM

listens2glenn on January 24, 2014 at 9:44 AM

My responses to ALT and the other guy on this issue de-facto respond to your non point. But let me rehearse why people should be allowed to call themselves and ask that others refer to them as African-American(and as a caveat, I refer to myself as black for my own reasons, but don’t mind being called African-American):

1. On the simple grounds of manners and proper home training you should call people what they are asked to be called, and expect them to do the same for you.

2. African-American offers people a more positive mark of community and self-identity than “black” which has a powerful etymological link to negativity in the English language (check out Winthrop Jordan’s magisterial White Over Black).

3. White Americans engage their ethnic heritage in all sorts of ways that you are choosing to ignore because you imagine that calling someone an African American is acquiesence to a political agenda, when it is just common courtesy.

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 10:09 AM

Funny how ALT’ critics walk right into making her point for her.

Until ‘african-americans’ can reference their experiences as former africans, and their lives back in africa, (like ALT can do concerning HER life experiences) they are simply Americans.

Surely others can see through this game they’re losing.

pambi on January 24, 2014 at 10:16 AM

Funny how ALT’ critics walk right into making her point for her.
Until ‘african-americans’ can reference their experiences as former africans, and their lives back in africa, (like ALT can do concerning HER life experiences) they are simply Americans.
Surely others can see through this game they’re losing.
pambi on January 24, 2014 at 10:16 AM

1. Another totally arbitrary standard about the “rules” of hyphen identities that’s not based in anything but your opinion.

2. Why might most African Americans be unable to be exact as the descendants of Europeans? The weird intensity of these “rules” and “standards” seem to be about creating a standard that is impossible to meet for a formerly enslaved people. That seems to retroactively validate the things slaveowners did to cut Africans off from their heritage on plantations. Religious practices, cultural traditions were all criminalized starting in the late 18thcebtury because planters (rightly ) believed that language and spiritual practices made it easier for enslaved people to organize revolts. Check out the history of the Stono Rebellion and the laws passed around forced christianization and English language training and the banning of the “talking drum.” So when your heritage is a crime for a century or so before emancipation, how might you even trace that lineage? “African-American” is an inadequate recourse to that. But even jerks like you and ALT won’t give folks that basic courtesy.

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 11:10 AM

Continue to build your forest around one very obvious tree, lib.
At least I’m a jerk in your eyes, so there’s that to smile about.

pambi on January 24, 2014 at 11:26 AM

That’s right, I’m calling Killary a sacrificial node.

Happy Nomad on January 24, 2014 at 6:52 AM

Racist.

Solaratov on January 24, 2014 at 12:31 PM

ALT proved herself quite the moron in that entire exchange. And also, apparently she’s rude as hell to strangers and acquaintances. No basic home training.

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 10:04 AM

It’s doubtful that you’re even housebroken, poofter…which is par for the course for your sort.

Yep. You’re still stupid…still an idiot…and still an azzhole.

Solaratov on January 24, 2014 at 12:40 PM

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 11:10 AM

Whine. Snivel. Cry. But…but…I’m a viiictiiim.

Just shut up, poofter. FOAD.

Solaratov on January 24, 2014 at 12:44 PM

mizflame98 on January 24, 2014 at 8:38 AM

The only time you show up here is to bitch at me.
I get it-conservative women like to eat their own.

annoyinglittletwerp on January 24, 2014 at 9:38 AM

That explains your stance on darn near every conservative woman under the media’s microscope.

mizflame98 on January 24, 2014 at 4:43 PM

Funny how ALT’ critics walk right into making her point for her.
Until ‘african-americans’ can reference their experiences as former africans, and their lives back in africa, (like ALT can do concerning HER life experiences) they are simply Americans.
Surely others can see through this game they’re losing.
pambi on January 24, 2014 at 10:16 AM

Actually, ALT’s stance is saying one is a hyphenated-American pushes them into a victim class. While I do agree with that notion, I think the messenger is a hypocrite for getting all high and mighty while doing the exact same thing she complains about for the same reasons: victim status.

mizflame98 on January 24, 2014 at 4:49 PM

There is NO validity/legitimacy in requesting or demanding that your “ethnic origins” be recognized “up-front and center”, within everyday political terminology.

It’s only done to claim “special status” for a ‘victimized demographic’.
Another way of putting it; “redistribution of political influence.”

To HELL … with ‘hyphenated-American’ terminology.

I also include using the term “native-American” in this debate, as well.

listens2glenn on January 24, 2014 at 1:57 AM

Well, . . . . . . . . apparently I’m still waiting for libfree’ (or anyone else) to reply to this comment.

Did someone post a reply, that I ‘overlooked’?

listens2glenn on January 24, 2014 at 9:44 AM

.
My responses to ALT and the other guy on this issue de-facto respond to your non point. But let me rehearse why people should be allowed to call themselves and ask that others refer to them as African-American(and as a caveat, I refer to myself as black for my own reasons, but don’t mind being called African-American):

1. On the simple grounds of manners and proper home training you should call people what they are asked to be called, and expect them to do the same for you.

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 10:09 AM

.
That courtesy is only applicable for an individual persons name.

Not for “descriptive identification nouns” of an entire ethnic group/political demographic.

2. “African-American” offers people a more positive mark of community and self-identity than “black” which has a powerful etymological link to negativity in the English language (check out Winthrop Jordan’s magisterial White Over Black).

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 10:09 AM

.
ALL “hyphenated-American” terminology is divisive. If the term “black” “has a powerful etymological link to negativity” in ANY language, then we’re stuck. There’s no resolving this.
.

3. White Americans engage their ethnic heritage in all sorts of ways that you are choosing to ignore because you imagine that calling someone an African American is acquiesence to a political agenda, when it is just common courtesy.

libfreeordie on January 24, 2014 at 10:09 AM

.
It is an “acquiescence to a political agenda.”

Additionally, I’d say you owe us some examples of “white” Americans engaging in their ethnic heritage.

I can’t think of any, off hand.

listens2glenn on January 24, 2014 at 7:23 PM

pambi on January 24, 2014 at 10:16 AM

.
Actually, ALT’s stance is saying one is a hyphenated-American pushes them into a victim class. While I do agree with that notion, I think the messenger is a hypocrite for getting all high and mighty while doing the exact same thing she complains about for the same reasons: victim status.

mizflame98 on January 24, 2014 at 4:49 PM

.
I disagree with you, as to ‘twerp‘s “motives”.

I think she’s poking fun at herself, when she uses those terms.

Nothing more.

listens2glenn on January 24, 2014 at 7:28 PM

I disagree with you, as to ‘twerp‘s “motives”.

I think she’s poking fun at herself, when she uses those terms.

Nothing more.

listens2glenn on January 24, 2014 at 7:28 PM

And you’re entitled to feel that way.

mizflame98 on January 24, 2014 at 7:42 PM

ALT playing the ‘victim card’ …
about to crack a rib, here, I tell ya.

pambi on January 24, 2014 at 8:25 PM

Comment pages: 1 3 4 5