There are competing ballot initiatives to legalize marijuana in Colorado. Some want to sneak it in the back door through a "regulate it like alcohol" approach, while others simply want to make it 100% legal. Either way and if either passes, we expect a flood of stoned ne'er-do-wells to take advantage of both legal bud and unemployment benefits.
As you may have noticed, or likely didn’t, Club Soda, he who refers to himself in the Royal Third Person, has been on a hiatus of sorts. But no more. Club Soda has returned with a vengeance, and wields his mighty pen/keyboard at all who dare to challenge him. For example…
Dopey Dopesters
Club Soda caucused last Tuesday at the Colorado Republican primary in Denver District 1 where he ran into the ultimate hipster dufus trio sporting Ron Paul duds and petitioning to decriminalize marijuana in Colorado.
As usual, Club Soda couldn’t resist and engaged said aficionados d’ Cannabis in a friendly debate about the merits of essentially legalizing pot in our fair state. Their argument boiled down to “everyone does it,” or, “Prohibition didn’t work for alcohol,” or, “it will hurt the drug cartels,” etc.
Club Soda’s counter argument was that legalizing or decriminalizing weed is all well and good on the federal level, but if Colorado does it every loser on unemployment from across the U.S. currently munching Doritos in the fetal position on their couch will pick up stakes and move to Colorado. It’s the Mary Jane Magnet effect.
They weren’t buying my argument, however, pointing out that marijuana use crosses socio-economic lines; responsible, upstanding citizens also partake at least occasionally in a recreational joint or two. Fair enough, but would this hypothetical responsible pot-smoking citizen actually leave for Colorado to use it legally? You’re invited to apply your own logic to this question.
Moreover, the argument that this would somehow put a dent in the drug cartels is utter nonsense. If anything, it will have the opposite effect as demand goes up in Colorado while it remains a federal offense. But when you’re stoned everything becomes crystal clear, so I’m headed to my local medical marijuana dispensary to better see their side of the argument.
Reason #492 I oppose direct democracy.
I have always advocated for republicanism or representative democracy as opposed to direct democracy at all levels of government, mainly because the average voter, Yours Truly included, is not qualified to make an informed and right decision about specific legislation. That’s why we have representatives; it’s their job, not mine nor yours, to plow through the legalese and discern the actual impact a particular piece of legislation will have.
And so I find myself in the unusual position of being in favor of a lawsuit being brought against Colorado’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights (TABOR), passed as a ballot initiative in 1992. Basically, the current TABOR law says that taxes cannot be raised without the consent of the voters through tax-specific ballot initiatives.
I agree with plaintiffs in this case, but with one important condition: If you throw out TABOR you have to cease and desist from filling our ballots with any initiatives or amendments in the future. I know why many of the plaintiffs are filing this case, and it has nothing to do with the primary Constitutional argument they’re making. They want to be able to raise taxes without voter approval so they can continue to grow government in their favor.
It’s no coincidence that the lead plaintiff is a Democrat representing Lakewood, Colo. in the state legislature and that among the plaintiffs are former University of Colorado presidents and others involved in the state education bureaucracy. Hmmmm… I wonder why they’d like to be able to raise taxes without voter approval? Still, I’m willing to cede this for the greater good of more republicanism in Colorado, if indeed a successful suit would rid us once and for all of those pesky ballot initiatives that are harmful to good government.
The lawsuit claims that TABOR, and I would assume any ballot initiative, violates Article 4, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, in which “the United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government…” But it makes you wonder why, after all this time and thousands of ballot initiatives, the plaintiffs suddenly discovered republicanism.
The premise of the lawsuit is shaky at best because the wording is not explicit or even implicit, that every state has to have a republican form of government. If that were the case, it would say something more like this: Every State in this Union shall have a Republican Form of Government. There is no doubt, however, that the founders were against direct democracy. In Federalist No. 10, James Madison wrote:
Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths. Theoretic politicians, who have patronized this species of government, have erroneously supposed that by reducing mankind to a perfect equality in their political rights, they would at the same time be perfectly equalized and assimilated in their possessions, their opinions, and their passions.
Madison continued that a republic “opens a different prospect and promises the cure for which we are seeking.” Madison’s opinion did not come out of the clear blue sky, but was based on a thorough research of history and the various types of government that litter it. Republicanism is not only common sense, but is objectively and empirically proven to be the best possible form of government.
Unfortunately, once you let the direct democracy horse out of the barn it’s quite difficult to bring it back. There must be an open, honest and public debate about republicanism versus direct democracy on philosophical and historic grounds. It will not be accomplished through a Constitutional challenge, nor should it be the Trojan Horse for public sector pigs looking for new ways to extract more money from the taxpayer and wallow in the proceeds.
During Hosni Mubarek’s rambling speech in which he refused to give up the presidency the day before he actually did, he referred to himself as a “father” and the people of Egypt as his “sons and daughters”. Really?
This, however, is not an unusual delusion for penny-ante dictators throughout history. Totalitarian states are notorious for being overbearing parents to their rambunctious children, and we know, or should know, the results of that relationship.
Concentrate wealth and power in Washington, D.C., and this is what you'll get.
That’s why I have such a hard time understanding Progressive ideology, which seeks to solve all of our perceived problems with big government. Some call it the “nanny state,” but it’s going beyond nanny and straight to evil stepmother. Cinderella is progressively harassed into submission whilst the sisters enjoy special favors. That’s how Evil Stepmother government works.
Hosni Mubarek emerged a billionaire from his 30 years of parenthood. He geared Egypt’s economy to enriching himself and his friends, family and political cronies. Mubarek’s version of central planning was less Keynesian and more Cinderellaian. But that’s the problem when you concentrate too much wealth and power in one central body, whether it’s a single dictator or 500 or so politicians.
Witness the spending spree over the past few years. People wonder why this supposed Keynesian approach to stimulating the economy didn’t work. Maybe it’s because, like Hosni Mubarek’s Egypt, it was Cinderellaian.
The bailouts and Obamacare were mainly pork-laden monstrosities meant to benefit the politically connected. Why else would groups who pushed for the health care bill suddenly receive waivers to shelter themselves from the ramifications of the bill? I sure as hell didn’t get a waiver, but I’m not part of the Teamsters Union or any other politically-connected group.
This is one of the primary reasons I’m conservative. I do not trust the Federal government to be my parent, which is why it’s shocking to me that those who consider themselves “liberal” do. I understand liberalism at a local and even a state level, but I don’t get it at the Federal level. Logically, Progressives should also be for a limited Federal government and enact their Utopian dreams locally.
Boulder, Colorado, for instance, is the model progressive state. There are cameras all over the place and you can barely breathe without some official breathing down your back about what you’re eating, smoking (unless it’s pot) or thinking. That’s fine, but it’s also why I don’t live there.
What happens when the values of Boulder, and the laws which follow, are force-fed to the rest of the nation? Is that really fair? I don’t think so. Let California go bankrupt after its failed experiment with Cinderella state socialism, but leave Colorado alone (except for Boulder)! Why else do immigration patterns in the U.S. show people fleeing blue states for red states? Maybe it’s because progressive parental policy is a big, fat failure.
Productive people prefer to help people directly, either through a charitable organization or one-on-one. Productive people don’t like having their money siphoned through the evil stepmother, who first hands it to the evil stepsisters and then gives the crumbs to someone who, more often than not, needs to get off their butt and get a job.
The problem is that Americans are becoming more dependent on the state than ever before. When nobody has fathers anymore, and they’re taught that fathers and parents are irrelevant, the state slips in and supplants the family. It’s been one of primary strategies of tyrants throughout the ages and is an effective means of ensuring a parent-child relationship between state and citizen.
Therefore, we should see in Hosni Mubarek and others like him a warning for us. If we limit government, we reap freedom and liberty. If, on the other hand, we decide that a large central government is the answer to all that ails us, we will reap a childish serfdom. The evil stepmother will dispense her favors through a humorless bureaucrat behind a window at some federal agency. The stepsisters will get the cash directly.
The proverbial elephant in the room in Megan Feldman's ironically-entitled political piece in 5280 Magazine, The Elephants in the Room, was the obvious Progressive bubble bias that, among other things, created a Bizarro Arizona Immigration Law out of the thin freaking air.
Following is a letter to the editor I wrote to 5280 Magazine, Denver’s hip, urban and edgy city magazine geared toward Denver’s upwardly mobile Hipster Dufus crowd. As a little background to my letter, Megan Feldman wrote an article in the November issue of 5280 about the implosion of Scott McInnis’ campaign for governor of Colorado this past election cycle.
Being curious and hoping to glean some interesting and perhaps scintillating information about how and why the campaign went so horribly awry, I was sorely disappointed. It merely regurgitated what I already knew and what had been covered by local media and here at the Daily Plunge.
What did interest me were the little throw-away lines and descriptions sprinkled throughout the text that revealed a certain bias. Bias is obvious and expected in opinion pieces, but this one wasn’t floated to the readership as an opinion piece, but as a hard news expose.
When presented as news, bias is a bit more subtle, but you can pick it up if you have a keen eye. For instance, when a conservative was referenced in Feldman’s article, he was saddled with the additional adjectival baggage of “polarizing right-wing Republican,” but the liberal in the race was simply the “Democratic candidate.” But that’s not all, as you’ll see in my admittedly sarcastic letter to the editor:
I have a difficult time believing anything Megan Feldman wrote in The Elephants in the Room when she trots out the usual Progressive Urban Legends, such as, “…he became one of the first major GOP politicians to praise the Arizona law that requires law enforcement officers to stop people they suspect may be in the country illegally.” Seriously?
I’m not sure if Feldman or the editors of 5280 are familiar with a handy tool called Google. Had they simply Googled the Arizona law, they would have found that the law says no such thing. But I suppose fact-checking is no longer necessary, as long as you simply repeat what you hear in the Progressive bubbles in which you circulate.
If you’re willing to throw out whoppers like that, with nary an editor questioning the veracity of the claim despite the presence of Google and the ability to access it practically anywhere, any time, it makes me wonder about the believability of the magazine as a whole.
How many of the assertions made in 5280’s articles are based on Progressive tribal knowledge? I get the sense through reading the magazine that most of its writers and editors are of the tolerant and open-minded Hipster Dufus set who were taught in college that it’s tolerant and open-minded to close your mind to all things that are not deemed as tolerant and open-minded.
Megan Feldman’s article merely makes my point.
So there! Interestingly, and to my pleasant surprise, the editor wrote me back and said that 5280 would run a correction in the next issue. That’s a positive start to what I hope will be a keener eye toward eliminating “what I want to be true,” ala the 60 Minutes Bush National Guard story, with what really is true. I will continue to crusade against fake-but-accurate coverage in my local news media. I hope someday you’ll join me.
Hola! Me llamo Tomas Tancredo. Soy de Colorado.
In a previous post, dated July 24, 2010, Yours Truly predicted that Scott McInnis would be Colorado’s Republican candidate for governor, despite charges of plagiarism. I also predicted that Tom Tancredo would not end up running as a third-party candidate and that, ultimately, Colorado would be saddled with another liberty-killing, job-killing, tax-and-spend, regulating liberal, current Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper.
Months later, it turns out that I was wrong on just about every count. And, my final prediction about Hickenlooper’s ascension to the governor’s mansion is increasingly coming into doubt. A recent poll shows Tancredo only four points behind Hickenlooper, which is within the margin of error, especially considering that six percent said they were undecided.
Meanwhile, Dan Maes, who won the Republican primary, is dropping into oblivion, fighting his own round of ethics problems. What those are, I’m not sure, but it is certain that Republicans are having buyer’s remorse and are moving in droves back to Tancredo.
In late August, the same Rasmussen poll had Maes at 31 percent and Tancredo at 18 percent. Now, Tancredo’s at 38 and Maes is down to 12, which shows that just about anything can and will happen in this election. Therefore, I apologize for my earlier post, which simply repeated the conventional wisdom.
Tancredo is well known as practically a one-issue candidate. Whatever the policy issue being debated, Tancredo is almost certain to bring it back around to illegal immigration. He’s been laser-focused on this issue for as long as I can remember, before, during and after his time as a U.S. Congressman.
Ironically, what has been Tancredo’s Achilles heel may actually be a boon in 2010. The Obama administration and the left in general have been so transparently dishonest about immigration that even Hispanics are starting to question the motives behind framing illegal immigration as a racial issue. It may not be a great idea to tell Hispanics who are playing by the rules to essentially step to the back of the citizenship line since we have tons of people breaking the law who are more deserving. And why are they more deserving? My guess is that they represent a gigantic and uneducated voting bloc that is less likely to starve the oxygen that feeds the fire of today’s Democratic Party: dependency and grievance mongering. Ignorance is the political elixir that keeps progressive/leftist ideology from completely falling out of favor in America.
Like me, a lot of people are exhausted by the constant racially-divisive demagoguery. Look around you; it’s 50 years after Jim Crow! Can we please move on and judge people by the content of their character, rather than this childish insistence on defining people by their ethnicity, sex or whatever the identity du jour might be? Progressives are wearing the ideological equivalent of plaid polyester as they, with dramatic irony, refuse to progress past 1972.
As usual, I digress, and will continue to digress in upcoming posts that officially endorse other candidates across our great land. Next time we’ll discuss the race in the 37th Congressional District in Los Angeles County where Star Parker is poised to help break the shackles of those toiling under the yoke of Uncle Sam’s Plantation…
Flush, Flush, Fizz, Fizz, and so forth: Club Soda is taking the the Daily Flush mantle and making it his own whilst Henshaw boozes his way across Idaho. The title of this temporary series, in lieu of the Flush, recognizes the fizz in Club Soda and the likeliness that it will be posted inconsistently.
Plagiarism Pays? Apparently it did for Colorado Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott McInnis, to the tune of $300,000. That’s $300,000, as in a 3 with five zeroes behind it. I need to renegotiate my contract with The Daily Plunge! McInnis “wrote” a series of essays about water rights that turned out to be written mostly by Colorado Supreme Court Justice Gregory Hobbs years earlier. McInnis blames it on a research assistant; the research assistant blames McInnis, and so it goes. McInnis claims that when you’re a busy politician stuff falls through the cracks. Be that as it may, my vote in the Republican primary is going to Dan Maes. I’m exhausted by career politicians whose first priority is Me, followed by I.
Handicapping Colorado: Tom Tancredo, former U.S. Congressman best known either fairly or unfairly as a one-issue politician (immigration), is threatening to join the fray as the third candidate to vie in the Republican gubernatorial primary on Aug. 10. It’s probably not going to happen and it will still be the seasoned politician with a peppery past of questionable ethics, McInnis, against Maes, who has little to no name recognition. McInnis will win the primary because people can’t help themselves when they look at a ballot and see a name they’re familiar with. Why bother researching the candidates before you vote? That wouldn’t be the democratic way. The McInnis scandal virtually assures that the Democratic nominee, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, will be
Colorado’s next governor. Though Hickenlooper is sure to saddle Coloradoans with higher taxes and more intrusive regulations he can’t be all bad. He was one of the founders of the Wynkoop Brewing Company in Denver’s LoDo district. The beer is fantastic, but I always keep a close eye on my wallet when I’m there.
Lohan Watch: Oops! I meant Lauper Watch… You may remember Cyndi Lauper from such one-hit wonders of the 1980s as Girls Just Want to Have Fun and True Colors. Okay, so that makes her a two-hit wonder and, apparently, an expert on foreign and domestic policy. Here’s a sampling of Ms. Lauper elevating the discussion in America. Ignorance and Intolerance Warning: http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/jjmnolte/2010/07/23/cyndi-lauper-bush-a-criminal-evangelism-bullsht-nsfw/
Dude! It's another sign of the Apocalypse!
Around the corner from my home in Denver sits a fairly lonely mini strip center. About a month or so ago it consisted of a pizza parlor and a liquor store with a vacancy in between. Then, some genius drove by and had a brainstorm. “Dude, what’s the perfect business to complement the pizza and liquor purveyors who comprise this mercantile center?” Thus CannaMart was born, or at least that’s the way I like to imagine it was born.
If you haven’t guessed what CannaMart sells, it goes by many names: Mary Jane, ganja, reefer, weed, dope, smoke, grass, wacky tobacky, diggity dank, marijuana and, of course, cannabis. I learned of its existence via the mouths of babes, namely my children, who noticed the new sign heralding this weed-dispensing establishment. That should have been my first warning that maybe medical marijuana isn’t the best thing for my community, but of course my interest was piqued.
Colorado voters legalized marijuana for medical use in 2000. At that time, the dispensation of said weed was quite restrictive. In 2007 a court lifted the five-patient limit and the next thing you know they were popping up all over Denver and other points and places around Colorado to the point that one of Denver’s main streets, Broadway, is now known as Broadsterdam.
Though I’d known of its existence – that is, legal medical marijuana – I was somewhat confused. Why isn’t it dispensed in pill form at a pharmacy? After all, it’s not the weed itself that provides the so-called medicinal effect, but THC and Cannbidiol (CBD), the active ingredients.
I had lots of other questions as well. The whole thing just seemed, well… off, for lack of a better term. So I figured the only way to get a handle on medical marijuana was to visit my local CannaMart.
The first thing I noticed was that all the windows are darkened, covered by black foam so that you can’t see inside. The barely-legible window sign told me that CannaMart doesn’t open until 11 a.m., an hour or two later than most businesses, but I suppose it’s best to keep hours similar to those of your “patients”.
I have to admit that I expected more of a third-world hashish market feel when I walked into the reception area, but it was actually more like a regular doctor’s office. I spoke with the receptionist through a clear bullet-proof window slot and asked her if I could speak with the proprietor.
Fortunately, I guess, she’s a partner in this business and was happy, or at least neutral, about talking to me about medical marijuana, so she buzzed me in through the locked door and into the belly of the beast.
Though she was fairly talkative and willing to answer most of my questions, she refused to give me her name or the name of her partner. In an ironic twist of fate, further research seems to indicate that this proprietor/partner is none other than Natalia, the Russian temptress who exchanged a series of love letters with the host of this blog.
I was also refused a request to take a picture or two of the medicinal area where patients can choose between varieties of smoke-able, edible, drinkable and encapsulated versions of marijuana. Natalia told me that CannaMart has an exclusive photography arrangement with someone else. Is that someone else a site dedicated to the celebration of the marijuana plant called Nug Porn? You be the judge. By the way, the existence of Porn Nug ought to tell you everything you need to know about whether or not marijuana is treasured for its “medicinal” value or for some of its other attributes.
I asked Natalia what motivated her to get into the Cannabis business. Besides her desire to “help people,” Natalia saw a recession-proof business opportunity. After all, she said, “What am I going to do? Sell cars? No one’s buying cars. Sell insurance? There’s an insurance agency on every corner. Real estate? The real estate market sucks.”
Northbound and down, loaded up and truckin', we gonna do what they say can't be done! Tell you what, I'll drive Bandit's car with a young Sally Field while we transport illegal immigrants from Arizona to their new home in Boulder, Colorado!
Don’t you hate it when someone cuts in line in front of you or drives in the right lane until the last moment, then cuts over and right in front of you when two lanes narrow into one? That’s basically the behavior those opposed to Arizona’s very sensible and reasonable law are advocating.
They’re saying, in essence: If you’re not from Mexico or points south and cross the border illegally, go to the back of the line! If you happen to be in the process of becoming a U.S. citizen and you’re from Chad, sorry, but it’s now racist to go through the proper procedures. Therefore, because others are bypassing the system, you’ll have to move back in line.
As mentioned in Henshaw’s previous post, the City of Boulder (Colorado) has decided to take action and stand by those in favor of breaking the law. Here’s the key section of the official press release from the city:
BOULDER – The City of Boulder today suspended all official city-sponsored travel to Arizona. The directive by City Manager Jane Brautigam is in response to the passage of Arizona’s Senate Bill 1070, which calls for police in that state to use “reasonable suspicion” to question and detain possible undocumented immigrants.
“The city is taking this action to demonstrate our opposition to Arizona’s new public policy, signed into law April 23, to require documentation for all persons who may be suspected of being in that state without official status or approval,” said Brautigam. “Such a policy is contrary to Boulder’s commitment to diversity and is a violation of our community’s core values.”
I don’t even know where to begin with the willful ignorance displayed by Boulder’s “City Manager” (placed in quotes because Jane couldn’t manage a t-ball team), but could she at least not mischaracterize Arizona’s law? If you have to lie to support your policy perhaps you shouldn’t be in a position of authority, but that’s just me.
My solution to illegal immigration used to be a little more complicated, involving a streamlining of the immigration process, the requirement that all illegals currently in the U.S. register and start the process of becoming legal and sealing the border good and tight. Now, thanks to Boulder’s convenient declaration from a thousand miles away, I have a new solution: ship all illegal immigrants caught at the border to Boulder!
I’m happy to rent an 18-wheeler and help out. There will be no discrimination. Whether you’re here simply to support your family or you need to contact your compañeros in MS 13, we won’t ask any questions. We’ll just drop you off at Boulder’s city limits and wish you the best in your new hometown. Since Boulder is all about “diversity” and other politically-correct words that mean nothing I’m sure the city will welcome its new citizens with open arms.
It’s time to add Boulder, Colorado to the list of city governments that would rather ignore the law than enforce it. Boulder joins San Francisco in banning all city-sponsored travel to the state of Arizona. I can’t remember another issue where the Left has been so woefully ignorant. The Arizona law reinforces a law that Franklin D. Roosevelt passed while he was president. Every time I read “controversial Arizona immigration” law I want to scream. It’s only controversial because, to put it frankly, people are stupid. The city leaders in Boulder are stupid.
“The city is taking this action to demonstrate our opposition to Arizona’s new public policy, signed into law April 23, to require documentation for all persons who may be suspected of being in that state without official status or approval,” Boulder City Manager Jane Brautigam said. “Such a policy is contrary to Boulder’s commitment to diversity and is a violation of our community’s core values.”
Citizens of the City of Boulder be aware that a commitment to law enforcement isn’t a core value for your city leaders. When did “illegal immigration” become synonymous with diversity? Would liberals be prepared to enforce the law if white people (or I should say European descendants not from Latin America) were illegally immigrating to the nation?
Give Me Amnesty or Give Me Your Tax Dollars
I’m all in favor of legal immigration and there are millions of people around the world on lists waiting to come here legally. Why should people who are coming here illegally get to jump in line? This whole debate has almost become pointless because so many “progressives” refuse to read the “controversial bill” or look at immigration logically. It’s just easier to be ignorant and draw fake comparisons to Nazi Germany.
“Rome is the mob. Conjure magic for them and they’ll be distracted. Take away their freedom and still they’ll roar.”
-Gracchus in Gladiator
I absolutely resent the news media’s round-the-clock coverage of Michael Jackson’s death. I was hoping he would continue to fade into obscurity, become less crazy and die of old age at Nevemind Ranch. Why his death matters so much to the media is beyond me, but I also wonder why the media pays attention to what anyone in Hollywood has to say about politics or anything else of importance.
I’ll admit to a certain bias here: I hate Celebrity and the worship of Celebrity in America. Celebrity, not religion, is the opiate of the masses. But I suppose Celebrity is a religion in its own right with its own rites, altars and priesthoods, not to be confused with Jason Priestly, formerly of Beverly Hills 90210 fame.
The rise of Celebrity in America coincides with the willingness of the American people to cede their liberties to the state. Americans believe all kinds of myths because the celebrity culture anesthetizes them to the truth. Celebrity offers easy, pre-packaged answers that require little intellectual effort. Why look into an issue on my own when I’ve got Oprah, George Clooney, Pamela Anderson and Michael J. Fox doing the research for me?
For instance, it has become a truism via the Celebrity culture that embryonic stem cell research, of course funded by the taxpayer, is the only way to cure diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s. In reality, the most successful research and actual progress has been made with adult stem cells. But let’s not let facts get in the way when said “facts” have already been cherry-picked for us, and when they happen to coincide with one of Celebrity’s favorite causes, abortion. Yeah for the death of those that are inconvenient to us!
“The science is settled” on any number of topics, according to Celebrity and its minions in Congress. All of the bad weather anywhere in the world is caused by man’s selfish consumption, and must be stopped. Of course, as a Celebrity (or a member of Congress), and because I’m so important, I cannot possibly curb my consumption. “Let them eat cake” has been replaced with, “Let them drive clown cars!”
That is why our spoiled aristocracy – the 21st Century Marie Antoinette – is in favor of the supremacy of the state over the individual. It’s very similar to the feeling a lot of Coloradoans have about their state, best summarized by the bumper sticker fashioned like a Colorado license plate that says, “No Vacancy“. I freely admit to feeling the same way. Now that I’m here, I’d like to fence off the state and not allow another person to darken its borders.
In the same way, celebrities and other hyper-rich, powerful people (such as Avon’s Andrea Jung mentioned in a previous Club Soda post) want to fence off the American Dream and keep the bounty and freedom of America to themselves. It’s a form of arrogance that says they’re individuals while the rest of us are simply numbers in a census (conducted by ACORN, of course).
So, while the media devotes itself to non-stop coverage and posthumous tributes to the King of Pop, Americans are being screwed by another unreadable, voluminous, multi-trillion-dollar bill that will finally defeat climate change and the American economy in one fell swoop.
The media, once again, is asleep at the wheel, celebrating celebrity and accepting at face value the pronouncements of the aristocracy that something “must be done.” Bread and circuses, if you will. When this monstrosity of a bill passes, Denver’s weather better be like San Diego’s year-round, or I’m going to be pissed.
Recent Comments