sobo

I just can't see how the SCOTUS could logically rule in that direction either, if it ever came to that. When sperm meets ovum and fertilization takes place, is that life? Well, yeah, technically. The extreme beginning of it, at least. A helluva lotta other stuff still has to happen yet... But is it "personhood"? Hell no, it ain't. Why can't we all just leave Roe v. Wade alone, ferchrissakes!!?? Fuckin' fundie Kristian wankers...

Somebody better tell Michael Tait. I hear he's on the loose in Tennessee...

Dood, that's what the "medical dispensaries" are for. Duh. Not true. I-502 has nothing to do with the existing medical marijuana law (medical dispensaries still exist a legal gray area in WA, BTW). It requires the state to sell pot directly, not through dispensaries or other private entities. My understanding is that it also allows the user to privately grow his own, up to 30 plants at any one time, I believe. The "medical dispensaries" comment was just a (shitty) joke for ivan, Pat. I know nothing really about I-502. It's just not in my kitchen cuz I put the bong down years and years ago.

Good news!

Right, but he still "Likes" Dan's work. That was the comment made.

Wow... seems like the guy might have lost his focus a wee bit. Sure hope he ain't the spokesperson for Portland's OWS...

Outdated, outmoded, monopolistic oligarchy. I have no qualms with the State regulating the sales of liquor (via enforcement and/or legislation regarding minimum age, etc.). I just don't believe they should be the ones selling it.

Dood, that's what the "medical dispensaries" are for. Duh.

Definitely worth it, OW. Loved the Kitty Train scene. Still, I think "Cows" was the epitome of this genre...

So, technically not a gateway drug then, eh?

Thank you.

To whom is that comment addressed, please?

Precisely! Hence, the opposition's cries of a higher incidence of teen drinking with the passage of I-1183 just doesn't wash with me. It's nothing more than emotionally charged over-reaction, shrill scare tactics, and the plucking of heartstrings....

+1 Precisely!

I currently buy wine at both CostCo and at small wine shops and will continue to do so. I currently buy liquor from a monopoly and now will have... well a set of stores to buy from. There will be chains that spring up outside of CostCo - in California Beverages & More is one such chain, which sells both hard liquor and a great selection of wines. BevMo is da shitz, man! :tup:

It is my contention that teen drinking does not begin at the liquor store (at least, it never did for me). Teens acquire their alcohol either by stealing it from their parents, purchasing it themselves with a fake ID, or finding someone 21 or older to purchase it for them. The former will continue until hell freezes over. The latter two will occur whether or not I-1183 passes or fails, just as it occurs now. So the argument that getting the State out of liquor sales and putting it into the hands of private enterprise will increase the incidence of teen drinking just doesn't flush.

http://protectourcommunities.com/1083-getfacts Sorry, Kurt, but I do not agree with the opposition's assessment. And I educated myself on the issue since the last time this came up. My vote is a considered action, not a knee-jerk one. I-1183 has provisions to restrict sales to minors, and provides doubled penalties for failing to follow those provisions. The "protect our children" angle is a shrill and devious obfuscation tactic employed by those that would wish to see their monopoly of liquor sales profits continue unabated. Litmus test: Look at the list of those who endorse the status quo, then look at the list of those that support I-1183. I-1183 http://www.yeson1183.com/?_c=104iwnr2mx09p77 http://www.yeson1183.com/facts/?_c=104iwnr2mx09p77

As I understand the proposal, the law would NOT allow smaller stores to sell spirits, unless there is not a 10,000 SF facility in the area. There are now no "specialty stores" except STATE RUN liquor stores. ALL of them will close. I agree that the State should not be our liquor store. But I don't like this particular proposal. Please see my reply above, notably the last sentence in the fifth (parsed) quote of your original post, wherein I agree that there are currently no specialty stores that deal solely in spirits in WA. And correct again that if there are no large facilites (>10k SF) in the area, then a smaller store can be licensed, after public input and approval according to existing zoning laws. In response to your statement that "ALL of them will close," what the law will do is eliminate the WSLCB's power to operate state liquor stores and to supervise contract liquor stores. Yes, those WSLCB stores will close temporarily, BUT the law further requires the WSLCB to sell its assets and auction the rights to operate stores at the same locations where the WSLCB conducted business. So I see a lot of private enterprise folks lining up to purchase those rights and re-open those same stores. I see many of those same stores reopening; they'll just be "under new management."

Nope! Voted "yea" and am very proud to have done so. Wholeheartedly agree. Again, totally agree. I-1183 provides for the sale of spirits and wine in lesser-floor-area stores when larger venues are not readily available. Also, the initiative provides for any former WSLCB store to continue to sell wine and spirits as a private enterprise. I expect that a lot of them will do this, so I do not foresee a drop in "conveniently located" stores. And it also provides for smaller stores to be licensed where no "big box" stores, grocery stores, or former WSLCB stores exist, thereby increasing convenience for them country folk out in Roy that don't want to drive 30 miles to get their squeez'ns. And I became of purchasing age in Virginia when it was still 18, and they also sold spirits and wine in the mini-marts. Although I did not see anything in the legislation specifically calling for the closure of existing wine specialty stores and/or wine bars/tasting rooms smaller than 10,000 SF, I do not expect that any such stores/bars/rooms will be forced to close their doors under this legislation. That would be stupid and in direct conflict with the allowance for the opening of stores smaller than 10,000 SF. There are no specialty stores in WA dealing solely in spirits, since that is currently controlled/monopolized by the WSLCB, and the WSLCB liquor stores cannot be considered "specialty stores" by any stretch of the imagination. Agreed. Agreed, and I believe that 1183 does just that.

P-shaaaa! Pharmaceutical grade BS, my ass. The bullshit here is WEAPONS grade!!!1

I think that there must be something like a bag of fortune cookies out there somewhere that all liars dip into. They just pull out the scrips and read their excuse to the media. And there's no need to add the "in bed" at the end...

P-shaaaa! I mailed that puppy in last Monday! THIS IS AN IMPORTANT ISSUE!!!1

Before you ask me, "HEY SOBO! WHAT TIME IS IT???" ...ask me how I voted on I-1183. Now really, would you have expected me to vote any other way? :brew:

Great article, Dan! And you've been endorsed by the Master of the Seventh Grade himself. Good on ya!

Your hearing's fine. I heard him say the same thing last night when I listened to the podcast. Either that, or I need my hearing checked, too. Still ain't found nuthin'...