Tucker Carlson on Marijuana

[Superfluous Man]

No, you are wrong.

How do you know?

I don't know why this is so difficult for people on this site.

You have this habit of assuming that people who know about things that you don't know about must fail to grasp concepts.

Consider the possibility that I saw something from Tucker other than whatever it was you saw.

You just can't stand to see somebody who mostly embodies the conservative/libertarian viewpoint become successful

Please provide the quote from me that indicates I can't stand seeing somebody who mostly embodies the conservative/libertarian viewpoint become successful.

[dannno]

How do you know?

Because you always try and divide the liberty movement by pitting the base against whoever is doing well and is generally on our side. Why would I expect anything different this time?

[Superfluous Man]

Because you always try and divide the liberty movement by pitting the base against whoever is doing well and is generally on our side. Why would I expect anything different this time?

Can you find any examples of my doing that?

Even in this thread, I've mainly defended Tucker.

[enhanced_deficit]

Is it better to have no allies?
Ron worked with Kucinich who was much worse than Tucker.
You have to watch your back but you need to work with people who aren't perfect.

You raise a valid point, anti-swamp purism is getting bit out of hand lately.
Even MAGA himself is working closely with his top funder Sheldon 'US should drop nukes on Iran' Adelson who may be even worse than Soros.
MAGA is also working closely with Bibi 'Iraq war will be great' Netanyahu on Iran/mideast policy who may be even worse than Saddam Hussein on war crimes/human rights violations.
MAGA is working closely with Iraq war neocon Elliot Abrahm on Venez intervention project and with Jeffrey Epstein's 'sweet dealer' on other America-First cabinet projects.
MAGA used to work with and fund Hillary who may be worse than Obama.
Many more such examples.

Point is that pragmatism is the name of the game, sometimes you have to work with those in the swamp to get out of the swamp. Let's leave the idealism of 'drain the swamp' in the pre-election campaign days where it belong.

[Superfluous Man]

Here's an example of what I'm talking about. The video from Tucker's show is available at the bottom of the article.

I know that there are other times where he's said he's for legalization of marijuana. But here, he frames the entire segment around a general opposition to legalizing it. Most of what he says could be called just criticizing the use of it and not the legalization of it. But at parts, he's definitely talking about legalizing it, and says so.

He may be able to turn around and say that nowhere in this segment does he ever explicitly say that he's against legalizing it. But there's no getting around the fact that that's the general tenor of the whole segment, from his opening remarks about Canada, to the text shown on the bottom of the screen, to the fact that all that his guest is arguing for is a very moderate legalization with regulation position and Tucker has not a single positive word to say about his position, to the multiple times throughout the segment where he explicitly criticizes politicians and corporations solely for supporting legalization. Tucker makes a rhetorical move throughout the whole segment where he conflates support for legalization with support for smoking weed. It's not I who am doing that, it's Tucker who does. He's the one who, in this segment, finds the distinction between supporting the freedom to do something and supporting actually doing it hard to grasp.

http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arch...uana-malarkey/

So, when Tucker at other times turns around and says that he's still for legalizing weed, is he talking out both sides of his mouth. Yes, I think so. Feel free to disagree.

[Superfluous Man]

Here's another segment where Tucker tries to take both sides of this issue at once right within this single segment. After showing videos of Cory Booker and Kamala Harris speaking in support of legalization, he prefaces the rest of the segment by saying that he doesn't think people should be put in jail for smoking weed or believe that the drug war has worked very well. But then, from that moment on, the entire segment criticizes politicians simply for supporting legalization, and repeatedly accuses them of supporting marijuana use itself, and even pushing it on people, simply by way of wanting to legalize it. And repeatedly he (not me, but Tucker himself) conflates support for legalization of marijuana with support for using it by bringing up all these alleged ill effects of using it as a basis for criticizing politicians merely for wanting to legalize it.

But then we could go right back to his opening remarks and ask him if he is for or against legalizing it. This, to me, is a case of speaking out both sides of his mouth. It's not I who am failing to grasp the distinction between supporting a vice and supporting legalization of it, it's Tucker himself going out of his way to muddle that distinction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlBTOLDo7Xk

Again, I'm not a hater of Tucker. I have generally liked a lot of what he's done (mainly in the past more than recently). But we don't have some obligation to defend someone when they say something wrong just because other times they say something right.

[specsaregood]

Tucker Carlson and marijuana...

Which is odd, because, in person, Paul doesn't seem like a freak. He seems like someone's grandfather. I first met up with Paul after a rally at University of Nevada, Las Vegas. He apparently hadn't known I was coming but accepted my arrival with Zen-like calm, welcoming me into the seat next to him in the minivan and offering me baked goods from a plate on his lap. We were both finishing our brownies when he mentioned they'd been baked by a supporter. I stopped chewing. Where I work, this is a major taboo (Rule One: Never eat food sent by viewers), and my concern must have shown. Paul grinned. "Maybe they're spiked with marijuana," he said.

--Tucker Carlson

I still laugh at imagining Dr. Paul with a mischievous grin saying that to a shocked Carlson.

[Brian4Liberty]

Tucker Carlson and marijuana...

I still laugh at imagining Dr. Paul with a mischievous grin saying that to a shocked Carlson.

Funny story , but it does touch on a pet peeve of mine.

I am for decriminalization of marijuana. The war on drugs is counter-productive, destroys the Bill of Rights, is extremely costly, and hasn’t achieved anything. People who like it should feel free to use it for themselves.

At the same time, I would recommend against kids (or anyone) using it. Before any marijuana users freak out, go ahead, keep using, but don’t expect everyone in the world to use wth you, or to praise you for your use.

And sadly, we now have an unintended consequence of decriminalization, which is cooking a drug into food. There are new cooking shows on TV about how to cook with marijuana. This is such a bad idea. Are these people high? Obviously this has disaster written all over it. Kids, pets, people who don’t want to use marijuana will mistakenly take it. It will happen, guaranteed.

Are other drugs cooked into food? “Hey, here’s a nice pasta sauce with viagra, everybody dig in!” “Grandma made some cake with estrogen replacement drugs, who wants a piece?” “Have a brownie made by your sister, it’s the best way to take birth control.” “Crazy Uncle Lou made some wonderful guacamole, you can hardly taste his schizophrenia meds in it”. Brilliant.

[dannno]

Funny story, but it does touch on a pet peeve of mine.

I am for decriminalization of marijuana. The war on drugs is counter-productive, destroys the Bill of Rights, is extremely costly, and hasn’t achieved anything. People who like it should feel free to use it for themselves.

At the same time, I would recommend against kids (or anyone) using it. Before any marijuana users freak out, go ahead, keep using, but don’t expect everyone in the world to use wth you, or to praise you for your use.

And sadly, we now have an unintended consequence of decriminalization, which is cooking a drug into food. There are new cooking shows on TV about how to cook with marijuana. This is such a bad idea. Are these people high? Obviously this has disaster written all over it. Kids, pets, people who don’t want to use marijuana will mistakenly take it. It will happen, guaranteed.

Are other drugs cooked into food? “Hey, here’s a nice pasta sauce with viagra, everybody dig in!” “Grandma made some cake with estrogen replacement drugs, who wants a piece?” “Have a brownie made by your sister, it’s the best way to take birth control.” “Crazy Uncle Lou made some wonderful guacamole, you can hardly taste his schizophrenia meds in it”. Brilliant.

LOL, ya, you have some really misguided views on cannabis. That doesn't bother me a whole lot, because most people are learning the truth about it and some day you may come around.

The reason people put it into food and the reason people like it so much is because it treats hundreds of conditions in a safe and effective way. These are common conditions that most people experience at least one of. You can't overdose, it can't hurt you. If you take too much, it's just a matter of sleeping it off. There is no hangover, no toxicity, etc. It doesn't do any longterm damage. It doesn't kill brain cells, it helps regenerate them.

Most people who use it consider a health tonic.

[Brian4Liberty]

Here's another segment where Tucker tries to take both sides of this issue at once right within this single segment. After showing videos of Cory Booker and Kamala Harris speaking in support of legalization, he prefaces the rest of the segment by saying that he doesn't think people should be put in jail for smoking weed or believe that the drug war has worked very well. But then, from that moment on, the entire segment criticizes politicians simply for supporting legalization, and repeatedly accuses them of supporting marijuana use itself, and even pushing it on people, simply by way of wanting to legalize it. And repeatedly he (not me, but Tucker himself) conflates support for legalization of marijuana with support for using it by bringing up all these alleged ill effects of using it as a basis for criticizing politicians merely for wanting to legalize it.

But then we could go right back to his opening remarks and ask him if he is for or against legalizing it. This, to me, is a case of speaking out both sides of his mouth. It's not I who am failing to grasp the distinction between supporting a vice and supporting legalization of it, it's Tucker himself going out of his way to muddle that distinction.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jlBTOLDo7Xk

Again, I'm not a hater of Tucker. I have generally liked a lot of what he's done (mainly in the past more than recently). But we don't have some obligation to defend someone when they say something wrong just because other times they say something right.

I didn’t see Tucker contradicting himself in that video. His premise, stated right from the beginning, is that leftists like Kamala Harris have overseen a major decline in living standards and high levels of discontent, and Tucker proposes that they now support marijuana to pacify the ignorant masses. Call it the “soma” hypothesis (re: Brave New World). An opiate for the masses. Bread and circuses and drugs. Tucker likes to be outlandish, but it does make one wonder about motivations, especially with regard to centralized establishment authoritarians like Kamala Harris.

[Superfluous Man]

Tucker proposes that they now support marijuana to pacify the ignorant masses

But his basis for saying they support marijuana is merely that they support legalizing it. He conflates the two things.

Does he himself support legalizing marijuana? Even his own words in this segment don't clearly say if he does or not, though at points they seem to imply he does. If he does support that, then does that mean that he himself also supports using it, along with all the ill effects that he thinks go along with that? Obviously not, given everything else he says. But for Booker and Harris, that is what it means.

He's trying to have it both ways.

[Brian4Liberty]

LOL, ya, you have some really misguided views on cannabis. That doesn't bother me a whole lot, because most people are learning the truth about it and some day you may come around.

The reason people put it into food and the reason people like it so much is because it treats hundreds of conditions in a safe and effective way. These are common conditions that most people experience at least one of. You can't overdose, it can't hurt you. If you take too much, it's just a matter of sleeping it off. There is no hangover, no toxicity, etc. It doesn't do any longterm damage. It doesn't kill brain cells, it helps regenerate them.

Most people who use it consider a health tonic.

It’s still putting a drug into food where someone can very easily mistakenly take it.

And as our biggest resident advocate of marijuana, you continue to deny the most common and well known adverse side effect of THC use, which is acute panic/anxiety attacks, which leads to so many emergency room trips. That is fact, no debate involved. We’ve gone circles on this issue, nothing new.

Whether or not it can lead to chronic problems or trigger other mental disorders in certain predisposed individuals is still an open scientific question.

Yes, marijuana can be therapeutic for some individuals for some conditions, especially CBDs, which don’t have the same adverse side effects as THC.

This guy gives his experience on initial effects, and long term effects...

[Brian4Liberty]

But his basis for saying they support marijuana is merely that they support legalizing it. He conflates the two things.

You’d have to ask them why they support it, and IIRC, Kamala was on some show saying that she smoked it and inferred her reasons for legalization is that she likes it.

Does he himself support legalizing marijuana? Even his own words in this segment don't clearly say if he does or not, though at points they seem to imply he does. If he does support that, then does that mean that he himself also supports using it, along with all the ill effects that he thinks go along with that? Obviously not, given everything else he says. But for Booker and Harris, that is what it means.

He's trying to have it both ways.

As far as I know, Tucker supports decriminalization, does not advocate it’s use.

[specsaregood]

And as our biggest resident advocate of marijuana, you continue to deny the most common and well known adverse side effect of THC use, which is acute panic/anxiety attacks, which leads to so many emergency room trips. That is fact, no debate involved. We’ve gone circles on this issue, nothing new.

Also the new wave of people suffering from cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. which DW has had show up at her hospital a few times. Its a weird one.

A team of physicians in the country shared the experience they had with a handful of patients who experienced similar symptoms after smoking or ingesting marijuana-- the cure being a piping hot bath, and to cease smoking and ingesting the substance altogether. The term has made its way to the U.S. where a study was published by Colorado clinicians detailing how more than 2,500 cannabis-related ER visits were made at one hospital, just after the medical legalization of the drug in 2009.

https://www.hotnewhiphop.com/illness...ews.75684.html

[pcosmar]

Psychiatric drugs are terrible and ruining the people that are prescribed and addicted to them.

and they fund most Broadcast Media.

[Brian4Liberty]

Also the new wave of people suffering from cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome. which DW has had show up at her hospital a few times. Its a weird one.

https://www.hotnewhiphop.com/illness...ews.75684.html

Interesting. Uncontrolled vomiting by long term users. Hadn’t heard about that one. Most of the emergency room trips are beginners who have the panic attacks and think they are dying.

[pcosmar]

Whether or not it can lead to chronic problems or trigger other mental disorders in certain predisposed individuals is still an open scientific question.

OH Yeah,, and the subject if Lucrative "Studies",,and the very Obvious "Political Abuse of Psychiatry".

I read one recently dealing with depression... and The "study" showed that it is caused by smoking pot as a kid/Teen.

I read the methodology. The suppositions and conclusion.

And it WILL Be used to influence Legislation.

It is Total Bunk... a mixture of the worst pseudoscience combined with Political abuse of science.

I know because I was dealing with Depression long before I ever heard of Pot...

And it is the very best medication I have found for it... (as you will hear from many)

I really think the scientific Community needs to discourage these useless and unscientific studies,, before they lose all credibility.

[pcosmar]

Interesting. Uncontrolled vomiting by long term users. Hadn’t heard about that one. Most of the emergency room trips are beginners who have the panic attacks and think they are dying.

https://americanaddictioncenters.org...mesis-syndrome

cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome (CHS) is a “poorly-understood condition” that is believed to be caused by chronic cannabis use.

A newly created condition (2004),,

More likely caused by something in the edibles other than Cannabis.. but blame it anyway..

another Defined Condition that has absolutely no scientific evidence,,, but it's pot.

[specsaregood]

https://americanaddictioncenters.org...mesis-syndrome
A newly created condition (2004),,
More likely caused by something in the edibles other than Cannabis.. but blame it anyway..
another Defined Condition that has absolutely no scientific evidence,,, but it's pot.

At the same time, don't just choose to ignore a condition because you don't like the possibility that its real. FWIW, the first patient DW had that had it surprised her as she had never heard of it, and he had not ingested any edibles. He was just a multi-daily user that had been using it for years (smoking and vaping it) without any problems. Then one day, all of a sudden he couldn't use MJ any longer.

[Superfluous Man]

As far as I know, Tucker supports decriminalization, does not advocate it’s use.

That is what he says some of the time. At other times, such as in the two videos I linked to above, he condemns others for nothing more than supporting decriminalization.

That is the inconsistency I was referring to.

[Swordsmyth]

Really? Where?

Here, try using the search feature.

[Swordsmyth]

You raise a valid point, anti-swamp purism is getting bit out of hand lately.
Even MAGA himself is working closely with his top funder Sheldon 'US should drop nukes on Iran' Adelson who may be even worse than Soros.
MAGA is also working closely with Bibi 'Iraq war will be great' Netanyahu on Iran/mideast policy who may be even worse than Saddam Hussein on war crimes/human rights violations.
MAGA is working closely with Iraq war neocon Elliot Abrahm on Venez intervention project and with Jeffrey Epstein's 'sweet dealer' on other America-First cabinet projects.
MAGA used to work with and fund Hillary who may be worse than Obama.
Many more such examples.

Point is that pragmatism is the name of the game, sometimes you have to work with those in the swamp to get out of the swamp. Let's leave the idealism of 'drain the swamp' in the pre-election campaign days where it belong.

You can do both.

[dannno]

It’s still putting a drug into food where someone can very easily mistakenly take it.

Caffeine is in all kinds of drinks and even some foods. Unless I'm about to go climb a mountain, do some type of physically strenuous activity or go out and party, I can't stand caffeine. I'll bet more car accidents are caused by caffeinated drivers being caffeinated than by stoned drivers. I might have a small amount of caffeine if I'm driving late at night or something and don't want to fall asleep, but most people drink that $#@! all day.

People also mix alcohol into drinks. If it's strong you can usually tell, but if it's weaker you can't always tell.

There are all kinds of substances in regular foods and drinks that alter our moods and change our perceptions somewhat.

Cannabis happens to be one that is actually healthy.

[PAF]

Here, try using the search feature.

PAF comes up quite a bit.

Others also but not as of recent.

I don’t see SwordShill I mean Swordsmyth, however ;-)

[pcosmar]

At the same time, don't just choose to ignore a condition because you don't like the possibility that its real. FWIW, the first patient DW had that had it surprised her as she had never heard of it, and he had not ingested any edibles. He was just a multi-daily user that had been using it for years (smoking and vaping it) without any problems. Then one day, all of a sudden he couldn't use MJ any longer.

A new condition,,since 2004 (no doubt a "study")..

Now I have not been a "regular" user for years... Prison Parole and Poverty prevented it.
I have been a Regular,,Habitual,medicinal continuous user for the past few year,, finding myself in a Legal State.

"medically" is it admittedly rare. I would say the words "unheard of".

and the gastrointestinal distress is caused by something else they ingested,, that they are not even looking for because of Reefer Madness.

My step daughter was nearly killed by "doctors" in Michigan. an intestinal Blockage caused by scar tissue from a C-Section years before.
and they were pumping her full of Psyche Meds because it was all in her Head.

now,,considering that Cannabis is Non-Toxic. I have a serious logical problem with it being associated with Toxic Effects..
Especially with Mountains of evidence to the contrary...


Like the Psudosciene Depression study I mentioned.

They want to push SSRIs.

[Swordsmyth]

PAF comes up quite a bit.

Others also but not as of recent.

I don’t see SwordShill I mean Swordsmyth, however ;-)

Get your eyes checked:

Alabama Senate Passes Bill To End Common Core

Started by Swordsmyth, 03-25-2019

[dannno]

Interesting. Uncontrolled vomiting by long term users. Hadn’t heard about that one. Most of the emergency room trips are beginners who have the panic attacks and think they are dying.

Cannabis makes it difficult to lie to yourself. Mushrooms make it impossible. People who have panic attacks on herb or mushrooms are being dishonest with themselves about something, they are having a hard time facing reality, and so they go into panic mode. Facing reality is really the only way to overcome whatever difficulties they have been trying to ignore, and the panic attack is a natural way to deal with it. But they need to go through it, they need to face it. They don't need to go to the hospital.

These are precisely the type of reactions that help people move on in their life and become better people. Panic attacks are not a negative side effect of herb, it is a healing mechanism.

As far as cannabinoid hyperemesis syndrome, I agree with pcosmar that it is something else that is going on. I don't know anybody who has had it, or know anybody who knows anybody who has had it, and over the years that covers probably tens of thousands of people who toke regularly. Why wasn't it ever documented in the 70s, 80s or 90s? It seems to occur in specific locales at a higher rate than others. It sounds more like something that some growers are using as pesticide or something, that affects certain people.

[pcosmar]

It sounds more like something that some growers are using as pesticide or something, that affects certain people.

Any Pesticides or fertilizers used are generally on the labeling in Washington..

Private Labs that were already testing organic vegetables,, test Cannabis for content.

I would suspect a gastrointestinal response to edibles,,, or possibly an ingredient used.

Not to the cannabis,,, as a KNOWN* cure for Crones Disease ,and other intestinal ailments., Raw (unheated)cannabis eaten regularly .

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5193087/

*to some

[dannno]

Any Pesticides or fertilizers used are generally on the labeling in Washington..

Private Labs that were already testing organic vegetables,, test Cannabis for content.

I would suspect a gastrointestinal response to edibles,,, or possibly an ingredient used.

Not to the cannabis,,, as a KNOWN cure for Crones Disease ,and other intestinal ailments., Raw (unheated)cannabis eaten regularly .

If it were true I would also expect people to get the disease who have never used cannabis, since your body produces CBDs.

[specsaregood]

now,,considering that Cannabis is Non-Toxic. I have a serious logical problem with it being associated with Toxic Effects..

Or
lots of things are toxic only in very high doses. eg: nicotine is toxic in very high dosages
It could just be that in the race to make the most potent marijuana, some strains have reached a level where the dosage of THC or something else is so high that it is becoming toxic to some people. I