Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

People in the News (Cheech & Chong)
Findlaw.com ^ | February 13, 2005 | Associated Press

Posted on 02/13/2005 11:35:17 AM PST by kennedy

ASPEN, Colo. (AP) - Cheech and Chong may have joked about marijuana in their movies, but the comedians say they didn't touch the stuff when the cameras were rolling.

"We tried one time and we wasted so much film," said Tommy Chong, recalling a scene in "Up in Smoke." "We were in the car waiting for the cue, you know. And the camera's rolling and we're sitting there, you know, and neither one of us heard the cue."

Chong and former partner Cheech Marin appeared together for the first time in 20 years at the U.S. Comedy Arts Festival.

Chong said he isn't ashamed of introducing millions of Vietnam-era kids to marijuana. "When you think of how many kids died drinking alcohol, I feel I've saved millions of lives," he said.

Marin said their humor was appreciated by an unexpected group: "Cops were our biggest fans. Because they dealt in what we were dealing with everyday, but in reality... they saw the essential humor and they laughed."

Marin and Chong, who recently completed a nine-month sentence for trying to sell marijuana pipes on the Internet, said they are writing two new films, "Grumpy Old Stoners" and "Lord of the Smoke."


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: cheech; chong; davesnothereman; donutwatch; whytheycallitdope; wodlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 181-183 next last
To: P_A_I
"States have no delegated power to prohibit making & using most anything."

Delegated?

States had all the power -- back in 1789 they delegated some of that power to the newly created federal government. Whatever wasn't delegated, they retained.

One of those retained powers was the police power, and the states are allowed to prohibit making and using anything they damn well please, provided it isn't against the state constitution.

THAT is how the U.S. Constitution was written and ratified.

101 posted on 02/14/2005 7:07:57 PM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 97 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
paulsen decrees:

"To regulate includes to prohibit."

Listen to Mama, robbie; --- she nailed you to the wall with:
"If you can't tell the difference between [regulating] an artificially created state and [prohibiting] a living, breathing human being, I'm done wasting bandwidth on you."

Simply put boy, you been shown the dunce corner.

Hey, I simply assumed her "living, breathing human being" was a citizen -- you know, an artificial construct of the state (itself artificial).

The US Constitution & BOR's applies to people, kid, not just citizens. You ever actually read it?

You want to be part of society, protected by society's laws? Then live by them.

I do, -- and its clear you don't want to live by our primary law, the US Constitution. Why is that?

You want to take your "living, breathing human being" up into the mountains and live your life? Well then, you can smoke dope to your heart's content as far as I'm concerned.

Awwww gee robbie, you don't have to get all snippy about this..

(BTW, it's not illegal to ingest drugs. Never was. Ingest away.)

Tell it to hundreds of thousands of jailed 'ingestees', paulsen.. Then slither back to your corner.

102 posted on 02/14/2005 7:23:37 PM PST by P_A_I
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
libertyman:
People growing their own marijuana for their own personal use in no way affects interstate commerce.

____________________________________

True. - Same principle applies to making your own booze, -- or guns.
>States have no delegated power to prohibit making & using most anything.

-- They can only 'reasonably regulate' most activities, restricted by Constitutional due process.

Delegated? States had all the power --

Wrong again kiddo. 'We the People' have always had ALL the power. Check out our Declaration.

back in 1789 they delegated some of that power to the newly created federal government. Whatever wasn't delegated, they retained.

Yep, thats what our People did. They delegated power to both the States & the feds. As per the 10th.

One of those retained powers was the police power, and the states are allowed to prohibit making and using anything they damn well please, provided it isn't against the state constitution.

And the State Constitutions are subordinate to the US Constitutions supreme Law of the Land, and all State officials are pledged to support the US Constitution & its Amendments.
Read Article VI sometime, once you get out of that corner.

103 posted on 02/14/2005 7:46:02 PM PST by P_A_I
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 101 | View Replies]

To: P_A_I; robertpaulsen
(BTW, it's not illegal to ingest drugs. Never was. Ingest away.)

Tell it to hundreds of thousands of jailed 'ingestees', paulsen.. Then slither back to your corner.

It pains me to agree with Robert Paulsen,but I must point out that he is technically correct, at least in most jurisdictions.

Anectdotally last weekend a buddy of mine had a long talk with state trooper who told him that he was free to go (He was stoned out of his gourd and wasn't driving) because its not against the law to be high, just to be in possession. I sort of thought it was funny that cop was quoted as saying "You can be as high as you want in America, just don't let us catch in possesion or driving". Oh well.

104 posted on 02/14/2005 8:00:38 PM PST by somniferum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
So it is your contention that if marijuana were legal, people would switch from alcohol to marijuana, thereby "saving lives"?

Some would, some wouldn't.

This is contrary to your previous statements that teens would smoke less if marijuana were no longer the "forbidden fruit".

I never said that.

Have people switched from alcohol to pot in the Netherlands where pot is legal?

I wouldn't be surprised.

Do you have anything at all to support your contention?

My acquaintance with people who prefer marijuana to alcohol.

105 posted on 02/14/2005 8:06:05 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: libertyman

Well, RP, if you are truly being honest & aren't so concerned about our wanting to "smoke dope to our heart's content", like you say you are, then please--LEAVUS US ALONE & QUIT PUSHING FEDERAL POLICIES THAT TREAT US LIKE CRIMINALS...or confiscate our property, vehicles, kids, etc., or have us fired from our jobs when we use responsibly.

We are NOT a threat to you, RP: that is the LAST thing we wanna do, because we just wanna live our lives just like you wish to live yours (to pursue life, liberty, & happiness in our/your own way). We are willing to extend our hand of friendship to you, so why must you insist on throwing us in jail????


106 posted on 02/14/2005 8:13:13 PM PST by libertyman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 99 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Should a state, or states, be allowed to undermine and subvert Congress' constitutional efforts?

Yes, so long as that "undermining" and "subversion" consists of allowing what Congress has no authority to forbid.

107 posted on 02/14/2005 8:14:37 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]

To: MamaTexan

"I feel SO much safer now!
----I hope you caught the comedian Richard Jeni's similar riff on the Martha Stewart imprisonment on his HBO special,
enticingly titled "A Big Steaming Pile of Me". Hilarious.
and one of the most politically astute (and cynical) comedians around. And to think, I once accidentally met him on the streets of New York, and it was about 5 minutes later I realized who it was that just gave me directions to the nearest Starbucks.


108 posted on 02/14/2005 8:18:08 PM PST by willyboyishere
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mogger

Legalize pot and everything that goes with it NOW!

Yeah, and why not just legalize all 'victimless crimes' so we can all sleep safer... knowing our kids are not going to be victims of drug pushers!!


109 posted on 02/14/2005 8:18:35 PM PST by gpilot (Worth more than 45 min. reserve!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: somniferum
"(BTW, it's not illegal to ingest drugs. Never was. Ingest away.)"

Tell it to hundreds of thousands of jailed 'ingestees', paulsen.. Then slither back to your corner.

It pains me to agree with Robert Paulsen,but I must point out that he is technically correct, at least in most jurisdictions.

You wannabe lawyers are so cute...


"Technically speaking" [puff & swagger], at some point in the act of ingesting one is in possession, no?


But whatever, -- you have made your clever, nitpicking point, and that's what's really important, correct?
Who cares that thousands of 'criminals' are in jail for the act of ingesting 'drugs', right?

This Republic is dying because we have too many technically correct bureaucratic clowns everywhere we turn.

110 posted on 02/14/2005 8:28:22 PM PST by P_A_I
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: gpilot
why not just legalize all 'victimless crimes' so we can all sleep safer... knowing our kids are not going to be victims of drug pushers!!

Works for me.

111 posted on 02/14/2005 8:31:49 PM PST by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: P_A_I
I think cannabis should be legalized. However, going around making factually incorrect arguements does not do the cause any service, sir.

Neither do ad homonyms against people correcting your inaccurate statements.
112 posted on 02/14/2005 9:59:59 PM PST by somniferum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: somniferum

Yawn.


113 posted on 02/14/2005 10:02:20 PM PST by P_A_I
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]

To: willyboyishere
----I hope you caught the comedian Richard Jeni's similar riff on the Martha Stewart imprisonment on his HBO special, enticingly titled "A Big Steaming Pile of Me". Hilarious.

Absolutely Hilarious!!!

114 posted on 02/14/2005 10:18:54 PM PST by bobbyd (Damn, I've been tagged.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 108 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights
Yes, so long as that "undermining" and "subversion" consists of allowing what Congress has no authority to forbid as determined by __________________.

What goes in the blank, MrLeRoy?

115 posted on 02/15/2005 5:48:13 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 107 | View Replies]

To: P_A_I
"Tell it to hundreds of thousands of jailed 'ingestees', paulsen."

Almost all of those in prison on drug related charges are there because they were dealing or trafficking an illegal drug. They played the game and lost. They knew the rules.

Very few people are jailed (for a brief period) for possessing and ingesting small amounts of marijuana.

Tell your Bird Man of Alcatraz sob story to someone who cares.

116 posted on 02/15/2005 6:00:02 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: libertyman
"LEAVUS US ALONE & QUIT PUSHING FEDERAL POLICIES THAT TREAT US LIKE CRIMINALS"

Go above the snow line and stay there, and I will support legislation that makes it legal for you to do any drug you want.

You choose to be part of society, however, you live by society's rules. Deal?

117 posted on 02/15/2005 6:05:37 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: P_A_I
"And the State Constitutions are subordinate to the US Constitutions supreme Law of the Land, and all State officials are pledged to support the US Constitution & its Amendments. Read Article VI sometime, once you get out of that corner."

I see. So if Congress passes a constitutional federal law, and the law survives numerous court challenges all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, then the citizens of the states must also comply, correct?

And if a state official, pledged to support the US Constitution, attempts to pass state legislation contrary to federal law, why, that would be treason, would it not?

Well then, you and I are in agreement.

118 posted on 02/15/2005 6:17:59 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 103 | View Replies]

To: radiohead
Man, how many smoke filled, black-light lit dorm rooms did I sit in listening to Firesign Theatre?

At good 'ole P.U. in West Lafayette, the scene was the same in the '70s. I still have friends that pop out the one-liners every few months......surprised I have any "cain brells" left to remember... ;)

119 posted on 02/15/2005 6:18:54 AM PST by add925 (The Left = Xenophobes in Denial)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 85 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights
"My acquaintance with people who prefer marijuana to alcohol."

Well that would make for a compelling argument in front of Congress, wouldn't it?

You make Anslinger look like a statesman.

120 posted on 02/15/2005 6:24:56 AM PST by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 105 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 181-183 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson