|
|
Posted by Neredbojias on 11/10/36 11:29
With neither quill nor qualm, dorayme quothed:
> > From: Neredbojias <neredbojias@neredbojias.com>
>
> > With neither quill nor qualm, dorayme quothed:
> >
> >>> From: dorayme <dorayme@optusnet.com.au>
> >>>
> >>>> From: Neredbojias <neredbojias@neredbojias.com>
> >>>
> >>>> where's the article?
> >>>
> >>> I have put it at http://150m.com/opinionFolder/drugLaws.html for
> >>> you to read...
> >>
> >> oops, no I didn't, I put it at:
> >>
> >> http://dorayme.150m.com/opinionFolder/drugLaws.html
> >>
> >> sorry...
> >
> > Uh, you didn't tell me you wrote a *book* on the subject...
> >
> > Anyway, after reading for a long time, I saved the page for my later
> > perusal. Btw, IE "said" the page couldn't be saved, so I saved it in
> > Firefox, no problem. And I noticed that the little man at the end has a
> > very long something or other but the details are rather sketchy.
> >
> > From what I did read, it appears that you are against the legal ban on
> > illegal drugs. When I finish the article, maybe I'll be able to
> > determine how on earth you came to such a determination.
> >
>
>
> The little person at the end has very very very long legs (legs,
> Boji, legs!) for a specific purpose: to push down out of sight
> and sullying range some footers added by the kind web hosting
> service... at first I had lots of <br>s for this but something
> tells me they are frowned upon (they are what? ugly, bad for
> voice readers? I have forgotten... I use them a bit when I am
> lazy... but more rarely these days...)
I dunno... Using little people's legs through laziness is probably
frowned upon by those with firmer backbones also. Whatever, dudess.
Read your article, and agree more than disagree. The problem, however,
is a more general one than that associated with drug usage or even
prohibitions as a class. Let me exemplify by analogy.
According to rumor, Microsoft hires only those who graduated in the top
5% of their academics. Whether exactly true or not isn't an issue which
is particularly relevant if, as is likely, that spirit underlies the
methodology of their employment system. The result is that only top-
level students, "the cream of the crop" so to speak, work at MS.
Nevertheless, as we have seen, during the course of its history,
Microsoft has made the grossest, stupidest, most bungling errors of any
company east or west of the prime meridian. Why? Is it because their
goals are so lofty and advanced they are impossible to attain in a short
time span? No, that isn't it; it's simply because they screw up.
Again: why; why does MS screw up with such an outstandingly intelligent
cadre of employees? And again, the answer is simple. They screw up
because no limited subset of a society can successfully dictate rules
and procedures for the society as a whole. It must be a general and
generous mix from *all strata* of *social being* who guide and govern,
otherwise there is no hope for any real reliable substance to be gleaned
from an output limited by artificial selection no matter how brilliant
the source seems on the surface.
Now consider the typical legislator, his aspirations and motivations,
his personal image of himself and the image he wants publicly manifest,
and then deduce what his at-least-public attitude towards drugs is going
to be. While there have been some political martyrs in the past, my
only answer to that is "Don't hold your breath."
--
Neredbojias
Contrary to popular belief, it is believable.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|