Dude! Don't Bogart That Joint! (Click to Enlarge)

For those who had a difficult time following the life expectancy discussion, I suggest that you may wish to open your mind first with an esspresso and a buzz hit!

The United States' first marijuana cafe opened on Friday, posing an early test of the Obama administration's move to relax policing of medical use of the drug.

The cafe -- in a two-story building which formerly housed a speak-easy and adult erotic club Rumpspankers -- is technically a private club, but is open to any Oregon residents who are NORML members and hold an official medical marijuana card.

Members pay $25 per month to use the 100-person capacity cafe. They don't buy marijuana, but get it free over the counter from "budtenders". Open 10 a.m. to 10 p.m., it serves food but has no liquor license.

Pot cafes, known as "coffee shops", are popular in the Dutch city of Amsterdam, where possession of small amounts of marijuana is legal. Portland's Cannabis Cafe is the first of its kind to open in the United States, according to NORML.

Hmmmmmm.  Me personally?  Although I'm a big advocate of buying American products, I still would prefer Amsterdam.  I mean, if I'm gonna get all toked up, I'd prefer to do so in a city full of lovely tulips, several internationally famous premium breweries and their outlets, and some lovely, world class, art museaums.  Also, for me at least, it would be much cheaper to fly to Amsterdam any day of the week than Portland.  And, you know, the Moroccan Hashish is fresher...

Is it another sop to his far left base who have called for decriminalization for years, as well as railed against the "unfairness" if higher minority incarceration statistics that they say are mostly driven by "frivolous" drug laws?  Whatever, Dude...; pass the dutchie from the left hand side...

Or better yet, let's all sing along with Peter Tosh; "Legalize it!, don't criticize it..."

Rocketman

Given this initial reaction, it's hard to see how that will be the case; unless, of course, AG Holder is next in line at the bus stop...

Rocketman

In short, it says that blacks need to have a (D) choice if they're to make an informed decision. Because the (D) is the only trademark that makes it clear that blacks are being served. We spoke with Abigail Thernstrom on The B-Cast about this, yesterday. I spoke to Alejandro Miyar, mentioned in the above-linked article, a spokesperson for the DoJ, who said at that time, contrary to what he told CNS, that he'd be willing to answer questions in writing but that it was Department policy not to respond verbally to questions on Section 5.

One of the things that the memo implies is that white crossover voting is a good thing, but black crossover voting is to be discouraged. As Abigail says, "It's demeaning, it's patronizing, it's . . . liberal racism."

Here, on the other hand, is something that the DoJ aren't going to address: "multiple line voting." This example is conspicuous by the presence of fraud, but the idea is that a candidate may, for example, appear as the candidate for a particular office as a Democrat and also, on a separate line, as a Working Families Party candidate, and will receive more votes that way. Nothing wrong with that, right, Baracky?

So, in short, no party affiliation is bad; multiple party affiliation is good. Huh.

Dan Collins

Dan Collins is a dude who blogs. He used to blog elsewhere. Now he blogs here.

Website - More Posts