https://twitter.com/Solocuriosos_1/status/1673060797361029121?s=20

[image: 1688607681399-screenshot-2023-07-05-at-8.40.35-pm.png]

@Doctor-Phibes said in Cannabis for Chronic Pain: I wonder - is that because cannabis isn't effective or because doctors are reluctant to prescribe it as a substitute for opioids? I know several pain docs who have been pushing cannabis for years. It's been about 5 years since it became legal (for medical use) in Illinois, and since then they've been pushing it. Also, DEA has become very strict, VERY STRICT, about how much opioids can be prescribed for chronic pain. This, despite the lack of science evidence that chronic pain patients are dying of opioid overdose.

@George-K said in Someone needs a demotion: @taiwan_girl said in Someone needs a demotion: Oops! Errors like this have been posted in the past. However, this is, I think, the first time that it was made by a member of the military. They could easily sub-contract that stuff out to marketing weasels, or possibly they pick somebody to do it who they don't trust to do important stuff...

@89th said in What the actual hell is going on in France.: @Jolly said in What the actual hell is going on in France.: The melting pot works, but it only works under certain conditions. Be it America, France, Canada or Norway, a new immigrant must want to be there. The new immigrant should be highly encouraged to become a citizen. In this case, France first, Algeria second. You can't dump too many people into a new country and expect them to assimilate rapidly and smoothly. People need to immigrate as families, rather than as young, single males. New immigrants must bring skills or money to the table. General labor is fine, if that is what is needed. Yup good post. +1

You, sir, are right.

Well, that marriage was licked before it started.

I think it’s possibly even sisters. Very similar hair, and the one in front is blocking the screen on purpose.

@George-K said in SCOTUS on Harvard and UNC: Have you seen Thomas's smackdown? What are you referring to specifically? I'm looking for it (as well as the Roberts v Sotomayor debate).

@Horace said in A pond of liberalism in a sea of conservatives.: @taiwan_girl said in A pond of liberalism in a sea of conservatives.: I don't think it is a liberal vs. conservative problem. It is a problem in rural areas too, which I think are usually more conservative. https://www.houstonchronicle.com/politics/texas/article/texas-police-officer-shortage-prompts-handful-18112294.php "Some rural areas like Throckmorton County have no deputies at all. Others, including Tarrant County and Ector County, have had to send jail inmates to other lockups because they don’t have enough staff for their jails. And others including Bexar and Travis counties have been forced to rely heavily on overtime to keep proper staffing levels, straining their personnel and risking burnout." https://www.officer.com/training-careers/hiring-promotion/news/53061363/texas-lawmakers-scramble-to-boost-rural-pds-amid-state-officer-shortage etc. All of america has tipped against cops, who are seen to be forces of evil and brutality. It's a wonder that anybody wants to become a cop these days. Recruiting is down everywhere. Do you want to be the next world-wide pariah for making the wrong split second decision where you feel your life may be in danger? $20,000 signing bonus to be one around here.

Not very good teammates either.

https://twitter.com/ChiDistrict9/status/1676421319301251074?s=20

@George-K said in The SCOTUS 303 decision was based on a "Fake" lawsuit: The "flimsy thinkers," as you describe them claim that the case has no validity because, allegedly, the plaintiff did not exist. The cry is "Supreme Court ruled on a hypothetical!" Seen on FB: "...that's the problem with SCOTUS's ruling on this case which they had no business taking on (there was no injured party! Heck, there were no web sites and no gay persons had asked for one!!)" The point that is being made is that the State of Colorado stipulated that the plaintiff exists, and therefore, the case is legitimate for appeal, etc. Once everyone agrees the evidence is real, it's not up to appellate venues to re-litigate that. The flimsy thinkers I’m describing are the ones on SCOTUS, and they did not dissent for the same reason as lefty Twitter randos do.

Madam, even I have standards.

@Mik said in Interesting poll re: Supreme Court Decisions: Time to take out the trash. [image: 1688520726370-screenshot-2023-07-04-at-8.31.46-pm.png] The IP of the user is in Poland - at least at the moment.

https://nodebb.the-new-coffee-room.club/topic/25363/hay-cats-your-batty-post-of-the-day?_=1688518572406

genius