Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
41 user(s) are online (33 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 40

HeightsNative, more...


Forum Index


Board index » All Posts (TheBigGuy)




Re: Nobody’s Above the Law - Mueller Firing Rapid Response
#1
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

CatDog wrote:
Mike Flynn, Paul Manafort, Rick Gates, George Papadapolous.

Nothingburger lol. It's amazing how every conservative gets their talking points and lingo from FOX all at the same time. Somehow 4 people already are charged for this "nothingburger" and conservatives are freaking out trying to shut down the investigation and saying that the FBI of all organizations is liberal.

I also like seeing the evolution of conservative talking points.

We have never talked to any Russians and we didn't collude.

OK we talked to some but it was just in passing.

OK we set up some private meetings with them but we only talked about adoptions.

OK maybe we talked to Russians because they promised us dirt on Clinton, but they didn't have it.

Alright well, we did get some private keys to access the emails, but it was totally unrelated.

Oh, and even if we did collude, which we totally didn't, I promise you it's not illegal to collude with foreign governments.

Also, please ignore the fact that the former president told us not to hire Flynn because he couldn't be trusted, and the Attorney General said not to hire him because he was a target for bribery and corruption. Please ignore the fact that we hired him anyway, and fired the AG for warning us against hiring him.

I promise we didn't know he was up to anything shady, like taking money from Russia and Turkey to try kidnapping American residents. I fired him for lying to Pence. Actually I fired him for lying to the FBI. Even though I hate the FBI. The organization that I asked to stop investigating the corrupt guy I just fired. Oh yeah, and I fired the head of the FBI because he wouldn't stop investigating me and that corrupt guy working for foreign governments. Because we're totally innocent and this is a nothingburger.

Also I hope everyone forgets that another staffer of mine is being charged with lying to the FBI for trying to set up meetings with the Russians. And another couple guys are being charged because they worked with Russia to stage rebellions in Ukraine, and has laundered so much money for Russians that his own daughters won't talk to him because they know he has blood on his hands.

If I say it's a nothingburger enough times will you believe me that there's nothing shady going on? Please???


You really need to dig a little deeper... this whole investigation has now turned to protecting the compromised FBI and
protecting the democrat party. After all these months of leaks, including Director Comey's self admission, don't you think real hard conclusive evidence would have leaked?

Manafort's problems aren't even related to the election. If you fact check your "rebellion in Ukraine", the truth is the sitting elected government was leaning towards Putin and not NATO The Obama Administration (Clinton/Kerry) supported the"rebels" who overthrew it.

As for Benghazi (another in depth investigation by the FBI btw) that whole incident would not have happened if Obama/Clinton had not overthrown Gaddafi Government. Of course unstable Libya is still in chaos... but the open selling of African slaves in the public markets is booming.

Posted on: Yesterday 21:39
Top


Re: Just say 'no' to 'millionaires' marina on the south side of Liberty State Park
#2
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

iGreg wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
When I launch my kayak there I'm always astonished at the number of people who drive there and just sit in their cars taking in the view. Not my style, but it's PUBLIC ACCESS to a PUBLIC ASSET.



Are you able to leave your car there (in the launch parking area) or do you need to pay and have a recipe for boat launch to use the ramp as a kayak put it?


The south end of the park is heaven and not commercialized and hopefully can stay this way.



If he is referring to the public boat launch area, that lot appears to be free. Some weekends that launch parking lot is packed and I have never seen signs indicating there is a parking fees or boat launch usage fee.

The area is patrolled by Park Police / JCPD and it is a watercraft staging area for the State Police Hudson River Training. Can't imagine the proposal leaves that free water access open.


Posted on: 2017/12/14 7:06
Top


Re: Just say 'no' to 'millionaires' marina on the south side of Liberty State Park
#3
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

135jc wrote:
Fulop can play hardball here but folds to developers and increases the paulus hook height restriction. The truth is any footprint a marina would take up can be made up by expanding into the areas of the park that are not open to the public. Make the marina pay for the remediation of the land and for the bulk head. LSP is a beautiful space but huge and if done right this could be a nice addition to the South end


So tell us, how often are you at the south end? Sounds like never. Land in the middle is not a replacement for the waterfront. When I launch my kayak there I'm always astonished at the number of people who drive there and just sit in their cars taking in the view. Not my style, but it's PUBLIC ACCESS to a PUBLIC ASSET.

This has a lot in common with Trump removing protections for western lands. Taking public assets and giving them away to private interests.


And you know they will have to take away the free public boat launch there... that grove of trees is the only tree sheltered cookout spot for families. The northside marina is just a congested mess in the public walkways.

Posted on: 2017/12/13 21:56
Top


Re: Just say 'no' to 'millionaires' marina on the south side of Liberty State Park
#4
Home away from home
Home away from home


I am curious to see Liberty National's take on this proposal... I know years ago Tiger had to park his yacht over at the marina @ Battery Park. Would they want an active marina, this proposed size next to them?

Posted on: 2017/12/13 19:18

Edited by TheBigGuy on 2017/12/13 19:42:33
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#5
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
All I am doing is asking for information and posing some hypothetical scenarios to understand the issue more clearly.


Nah, you're being a deliberate & provocative idiot. You haven't bothered to look at the NJ proposals nor ANY of the other states that have legalized already. Not one allows under 21, just like alcohol & tobacco.



Your quote earlier but I ignored, but now I have to ask... and not to provoke you and kill your buzz man!

"In addition, marijuana is very different than other drugs. Unlike opiates or stimulants or alcohol, it is not habit forming. You can't overdose from marijuana. You can't die from the effects of marijuana. Marijuana does not cause acute toxicity. Evidence does not show that marijuana smoke is carcinogenic. It's not completely harmless, but it's substantially less harmful than pretty much every other recreational drug."

LOL With all your bluster "edukating" me on the safety of marijuana, you write that comment? And outside of marijuana and alcohol what other recreational drugs do you see useful to society? Why should I look to other sources of information when you are such an authority? I will just take your word.

I know to many questions from a provocative idiot. Say that wasn't an ad hominem attack was it?


Don't know who you're quoting there but it wasn't me, not that I don't agree with it. I think it's fair to call you a provocative idiot when you choose to be alarmist about minors buying, ignoring all precedents both for already legal drugs in New Jersey like tobacco & alcohol and states where weed has been legalized. There's absolutely no reason to think that that legal marijuana in New Jersey would be sold to those under 21.

People traveling to partake of recreational illegal in their home state is just artifact of that illegality. No one traveled to Canada for booze once we repealed prohibition.

Its funny, in the southern Oregon town of Ashland the only liquor store closes at like 6 so the college kids there have to drive an hour over the Siskiyou pass to California to get liquor after those hours. But the weed dispensaries are open till 8!



Oh... my error about the quote, it was from Dolimiti. It doesn't matter you agree. Not sure what the point of your Oregon story is... we still have Bergen County Blue laws.

I did get the part right where you were offended for being called a toolbag by some other reader after you called me a provocative dolt.

Apparently you missed (or refused to acknowledge) my link to Mulshine piece about legalization in the Star Ledger today. A opinion piece that got some readers in the same tizzy as you and Dolimiti.

I thought it was great! Bring the first wave of decriminalization access to Atlantic City and make AC the gateway city for legal gambling and marijuana usage. Brilliant satirical piece that nailed many of my concerns.

Posted on: 2017/12/10 17:09
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#6
Home away from home
Home away from home



@ Brewster

Seems like there is still time to discuss this issue reasonably... I haven't "picked a lane" yet but the comment about what has happened to Colorado since legalization was interesting. Attracting an undesirable element is one of the arguments used to kill building the casino outside of LSP.

http://www.nj.com/opinion/index.ssf/2 ... mu.html#incart_river_home

Enjoy your ride to AC. A stroll on the boardwalk is wonderful experience after midnight.





Posted on: 2017/12/10 9:54
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#7
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
All I am doing is asking for information and posing some hypothetical scenarios to understand the issue more clearly.


Nah, you're being a deliberate & provocative idiot. You haven't bothered to look at the NJ proposals nor ANY of the other states that have legalized already. Not one allows under 21, just like alcohol & tobacco.



Your quote earlier but I ignored, but now I have to ask... and not to provoke you and kill your buzz man!

"In addition, marijuana is very different than other drugs. Unlike opiates or stimulants or alcohol, it is not habit forming. You can't overdose from marijuana. You can't die from the effects of marijuana. Marijuana does not cause acute toxicity. Evidence does not show that marijuana smoke is carcinogenic. It's not completely harmless, but it's substantially less harmful than pretty much every other recreational drug."

LOL With all your bluster "edukating" me on the safety of marijuana, you write that comment? And outside of marijuana and alcohol what other recreational drugs do you see useful to society? Why should I look to other sources of information when you are such an authority? I will just take your word.

I know to many questions from a provocative idiot. Say that wasn't an ad hominem attack was it?







Posted on: 2017/12/9 22:02
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#8
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
@ Dolomiti

" Odd, it sounds more like you're fumbling for reasons to oppose legalization. Your reasons seem to change with every post."

Why are my comments odd?

Because... as I said... You're changing your rationale in almost every post.

1st post: Worried about stoned drivers. Then claims that governments want stoned citizens, which are easier to control (a ludicrous claim on numerous counts btw). Accuse state of just wanting tax revenue.

2nd post: Claims the state is jeopardizing citizen health. Accuses legislators of hypocrisy.

3rd post: Conflates marijuana and tobacco. Government is wrong to promote marijuana use.

4th post: Big Tobacco is getting involved!

5th post: Marijuana must cause cancer because it leaves residue on your fingers! Medical use for terminal patients is fine, but do we really want a society of stoners?

6th post: Drags gambling and prostitution into the discussion. Don't want to hear about tax revenues. Kids shouldn't get a criminal record over this stuff. Should we let the government run our lives?

8th post: Think of the children!

Pick a lane.


Quote:
I said I am struggling with the issue of making it not so much legal, but more available, particularly to teenagers.

No, as a matter of fact, you haven't said that. You haven't discussed minors at all.

Plus, the law will set the minimum age to 21.


LOL You are obsessed with my posts... now show me where exactly where I wrote that I was opposed to legalization, because that is what is fueling your OCD behavior.

In fact I said that I could understand a reasons to decriminalize. All I am doing is asking for information and posing some hypothetical scenarios to understand the issue more clearly. not sure why that is so threatening or even confusing to you?

At this point, after being accused of being a Trump supporter, being told "the war on drugs" was really a war on Black Americans, and getting a lecture from you about how a democracy works it is probably not worth my while to announce my decision because you would be presumptuous enough to assume you convinced me. I do hope this thread has made other readers smile.

Posted on: 2017/12/8 19:08
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#9
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
I am struggling with the issue of making it not so much legal, but more available, particularly to teenagers.


My relative the social worker says today's teens have easier access to weed than to alcohol. Why? Because since alcohol is legal but restricted to those over 21 there's no bootleggers who will sell to them, but weed is everywhere. Legalization will likely REDUCE teens access, since they will be the only customers for illegal weed and they usually have little money there will be no organized crime structures to provide it to them any more than there's rings to sell them booze.


I have no doubt your social worker relative is correct. But your bring up a good point... will the sales be restricted to 21 or 18 years of age? If it is 18, does a 13,14 or 15 year old really need to go to an illegal source when their older brother or sister can help them out. Does an 18 year old?

As a point of fact when the states dropped alcohol buy age to 18, fatal teen age deaths related to alcohol/car accidents spiked to the point where the Feds forced the legal age back to 21. Teenagers/cars/texting and now some kid dropping a half smoked doobie between the car seats during a hand-off.

Sounds like a few people on this board plan on taking advantage which is none of my concern. Hell, I might even try it one more time. Curious where your social worker relative comes down on this legalize plan?

Posted on: 2017/12/8 13:25
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#10
Home away from home
Home away from home


@ Dolomiti

" Odd, it sounds more like you're fumbling for reasons to oppose legalization. Your reasons seem to change with every post."

Why are my comments odd? I said I am struggling with the issue of making it not so much legal, but more available, particularly to teenagers. I am not clear on what the developmental impact on kids who have not grown to full maturity. Does it increase creativity/awareness or does it turn you into the "Dave's Not Here" stoners who sat in the back of my classroom glass eyed in a smokey haze. I smoked in my younger years... guess I grew out of it, particularly with drug testing for jobs. I guess I just look at using it ... and life differently now. And that is not a judgment on people still smoking. To each their own.

Posted on: 2017/12/8 8:04
Top


Re: Just say 'no' to 'millionaires' marina on the south side of Liberty State Park
#11
Home away from home
Home away from home


Those footprints are insane... traffic would render that section of the park unusable for bikers.runners. walkers. Did not take a good look, but I assume it would impact recreational boaters who use the "free" boat launch.

I am sure its the typical play to propose the ultimate obscene development as they certainly have here, then scale it back because they listened to the people. Most of that property where they are now contains more derelicts on land then in the water. It looks like Fred Sanford's Boat Yard.

Posted on: 2017/12/7 19:23
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#12
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

TonyTwoPoops wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

TonyTwoPoops wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of the nanny state's hysterical views on smoking versus their acceptance/encouragement about smoking a joint. Seems like the processes are the same, inhale a stimulant into your lungs.... yet smokers are treated like dirt in the culture today.


Tobacco is physically addictive and a proven killer of huge numbers of people, public enemy #1. Weed? Neither. Even a regular user might have a few hits a day, rather than smoking a pack or 3 like people did before the price went sky high. And yet tobacco is legal and weed is not. Note, we're not even talking about the derivative products, which are HUGE, and not smoked.


It is going to be interesting watching the long term health effects... It just seems to me the residue at the end of the blount or stains your fingers also coats your lungs can't be good.

When a close family member was dying from leukemia, he was smoking illegally, so I understand the medicinally relief. I also don't believe in criminalization for possession.

Is the classic image of the "stoner" really what we want for our society? Are the "3 hits a day" what you want co-workers doing? Just rhetorical questions? I just don't think it is the role of government to act as enablers.


As opposed to what? Drunk tobacco smokers who are forced to rely on anti depressants to get through another day in a capitalist society? Our society could benefit from having some people chill out and not depend on pharmaceuticals for physical and mental relief. The government has completely enabled this opiate and heroin epidemic and the only reason they are pretending to care now is because white rich kids are the ones overdosing.

You must be really upset by how much money our officials take from pharmaceutical companies? That is true enabling.

How big pharma and US officials feed the opioid crisis

People are getting “worked up” in their responses to you because your opinion doesn’t make sense-there is far worse that is truly enabled by our government that has been completely normalized because they line the pockets of our officials.


Sorry you got worked up... my rhetorical points have always been focused on what appears to be hypocrisy in government activity. Should the state normalize/enable gambling addictions through a state sponsored lottery advertisements while regulating tobacco/alcohol advertisements. That's what I am trying to rationalize.

I am more accepting of the argument to decriminalize possession rather than listening to a pro-legal point of political view that talks about all the new tax revenues. Saving a kid from a minor controlled substance possession criminal record is obvious. Listening to the political argument about 25% taxes and gloating about new revenue streams as they do to justify the NJ Lottery makes you wonder about the human costs.

All I am doing is posing some questions about the about what boundaries are good for a society... and what isn't. And also what is the role of government in controlling the lives of citizens? Why shouldn't we legalize prostitution?


You’re cute. Aren’t you a Trump supporter? I can’t take these statements as you sincerely caring about the well being of our society seriously if that’s the case. It comes across like you’re just trying to talk in circles so it almost seems like you have a point.

Never forget sole purpose of the “War on Drugs” was to put black people in jail. Your pearl clutching is fooling no one.


If you asking me if I voted against Hillary... YES. Sorry if my legitimate questions or comments make your head spin. There are other viewpoints out there to be heard.

Despite what your Mommy, Daddy and college professor told you, your narrow view of the world is not the absolute truth.

Posted on: 2017/12/7 16:55
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#13
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

TonyTwoPoops wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of the nanny state's hysterical views on smoking versus their acceptance/encouragement about smoking a joint. Seems like the processes are the same, inhale a stimulant into your lungs.... yet smokers are treated like dirt in the culture today.


Tobacco is physically addictive and a proven killer of huge numbers of people, public enemy #1. Weed? Neither. Even a regular user might have a few hits a day, rather than smoking a pack or 3 like people did before the price went sky high. And yet tobacco is legal and weed is not. Note, we're not even talking about the derivative products, which are HUGE, and not smoked.


It is going to be interesting watching the long term health effects... It just seems to me the residue at the end of the blount or stains your fingers also coats your lungs can't be good.

When a close family member was dying from leukemia, he was smoking illegally, so I understand the medicinally relief. I also don't believe in criminalization for possession.

Is the classic image of the "stoner" really what we want for our society? Are the "3 hits a day" what you want co-workers doing? Just rhetorical questions? I just don't think it is the role of government to act as enablers.


As opposed to what? Drunk tobacco smokers who are forced to rely on anti depressants to get through another day in a capitalist society? Our society could benefit from having some people chill out and not depend on pharmaceuticals for physical and mental relief. The government has completely enabled this opiate and heroin epidemic and the only reason they are pretending to care now is because white rich kids are the ones overdosing.

You must be really upset by how much money our officials take from pharmaceutical companies? That is true enabling.

How big pharma and US officials feed the opioid crisis

People are getting “worked up” in their responses to you because your opinion doesn’t make sense-there is far worse that is truly enabled by our government that has been completely normalized because they line the pockets of our officials.


Sorry you got worked up... my rhetorical points have always been focused on what appears to be hypocrisy in government activity. Should the state normalize/enable gambling addictions through a state sponsored lottery advertisements while regulating tobacco/alcohol advertisements. That's what I am trying to rationalize.

I am more accepting of the argument to decriminalize possession rather than listening to a pro-legal point of political view that talks about all the new tax revenues. Saving a kid from a minor controlled substance possession criminal record is obvious. Listening to the political argument about 25% taxes and gloating about new revenue streams as they do to justify the NJ Lottery makes you wonder about the human costs.

All I am doing is posing some questions about the about what boundaries are good for a society... and what isn't. And also what is the role of government in controlling the lives of citizens? Why shouldn't we legalize prostitution?

Posted on: 2017/12/7 12:40
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#14
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of the nanny state's hysterical views on smoking versus their acceptance/encouragement about smoking a joint. Seems like the processes are the same, inhale a stimulant into your lungs.... yet smokers are treated like dirt in the culture today.


Tobacco is physically addictive and a proven killer of huge numbers of people, public enemy #1. Weed? Neither. Even a regular user might have a few hits a day, rather than smoking a pack or 3 like people did before the price went sky high. And yet tobacco is legal and weed is not. Note, we're not even talking about the derivative products, which are HUGE, and not smoked.


It is going to be interesting watching the long term health effects... It just seems to me the residue at the end of the blount or stains your fingers also coats your lungs can't be good.

When a close family member was dying from leukemia, he was smoking illegally, so I understand the medicinally relief. I also don't believe in criminalization for possession.

Is the classic image of the "stoner" really what we want for our society? Are the "3 hits a day" what you want co-workers doing? Just rhetorical questions? I just don't think it is the role of government to act as enablers.

Posted on: 2017/12/7 7:21
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#15
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

brewster wrote:
The great thing about the weed/tax model is it scales locally, rather than being a disaster like casinos. It can be grown anywhere, so the entire economic impact can stay local, rather than sending the money elsewhere for wholesale product. I'd really have no problem if you could only sell NJ grown in NJ.

Tax schmax, Oregon is getting plenty of tax and it's still selling powerful weed for $8/g. Secondhand smoke? Is that really all you got? Clearly all the rules for public cigarette and alcohol consumption should apply. You can't legally light up in the streets in the states where it's currently legal. This is the "no place exists but us" crap that always pisses me off where people pretend there's no functioning models to look at.


I 'll have a toke of what you are smoking... I am just pointing out the hypocrisy of the nanny state's hysterical views on smoking versus their acceptance/encouragement about smoking a joint. Seems like the processes are the same, inhale a stimulant into your lungs.... yet smokers are treated like dirt in the culture today.

Big Tobacco is ready go switching to marijuana. There is no way NJ and Tobacco are going to let people grow their own. Hard to believe people will be stopped on the street for public toking.

Posted on: 2017/12/6 23:00
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

iGreg wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:


Just seems to be a lot of hypocrisy in some of the things they do. Is 2nd hand marijuana smoke as bad as cigarettes? Seems to me inhaling anything other than fresh air into your lungs can't be good long term.




Is alcohol and or nicotine addiction anything wonderful or healthy?

Yet these have been legally sold for years on end and nicely taxed, sheeit we even created a special police force called the ATF to make sure the tariffs are collected & paid.

Marijuana is the next big thing, RJ Reynolds is said to have bought up tons of primo grow areas in Humbolt County, California
just waiting to package and get their chronic on the bodega shelfs - sorry no more nickel bags of that Columbian Gold bunk.

#baked


oh... I understand. I just kind of smirk when the tax on a pack of cigarettes in NYC raises the price to $15 and the political anti-smoking nazis says the tax increase this a great incentive to make people quit.

Some how the tax increase on cigarettes is a good thing, cause it says lives. No... it creates financial opportunities for people to ship cigarettes in from out of state. Seems like 7%-25% tax increase over several years in NJ for marijuana sales is a deliberate strategy with the business owners. Why doesn't the NJ government just start at 25% tax outright? Marketing 101 says the entry price point makes it more affordable to more people. Something wrong with the government promoting this activity.


Posted on: 2017/12/6 21:08
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Dolomiti wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
As far as i am concerned most governments want their citizens stoned because they are easier to control.

Is that why marijuana and opiates have been illegal in the US and almost all states for decades?

And why the push to legalize marijuana has been pushed by the public in dozens of states, while the government in almost every one of those states has opposed legalization?


Quote:
The vice story said one NJ proposal wanted to start the tax at 7%, then after several years it would grow to 25%. No idea what alcohol is taxed at but it is pretty obvious the only thing they want is immediate increased usage and a new revenue stream that grows to feed their spending addiction.

Oooookay

First of all, alcohol is taxed at 12 cents a gallon for beer, 87.5 cents for wine, spirits $5.50.

Second, both governments and pro-pot advocates are openly saying they could use this to raise taxes.

Third, spending levels haven't changed much in NJ since at least 2009.

Finally, feel free to go over the NJ budget and tell us all what ought to be cut. You know that property tax relief is a huge chunk of spending, right? Maybe we can cut education spending, perhaps? Police? CHIP?


Not sure why you are worked up... the country spends billions on alcohol/drug/smoking/gambling abuse and awareness programs during a global opiate addiction problem. And here is NJ promoting marijuana and possibly jeopardizing the long term health of people for tax revenue.

Just seems to be a lot of hypocrisy in some of the things they do. Is 2nd hand marijuana smoke as bad as cigarettes? Seems to me inhaling anything other than fresh air into your lungs can't be good long term.


Posted on: 2017/12/6 20:19
Top


Re: Legal Weed Is Coming to New Jersey
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


I don't care what people go in their homes, but I am worried about kids getting access and the public safety aspects of driving stoned. Certainly jailing people for personal consumption is foolish.

As far as i am concerned most governments want their citizens stoned because they are easier to control. The vice story said one NJ proposal wanted to start the tax at 7%, then after several years it would grow to 25%. No idea what alcohol is taxed at but it is pretty obvious the only thing they want is immediate increased usage and a new revenue stream that grows to feed their spending addiction.

Posted on: 2017/12/5 23:30
Top


Re: Symes / Solomon runoff
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
Yes, similar factprs weree in play with Hillary. She deserved better.


Hillary should be in jail... she sucked as a human being.

Posted on: 2017/12/5 23:00
Top


Re: 2 JC Men Among 79 Charged in NJ Child Porn Investigation
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Yvonne wrote:
Single mothers with boyfriends are usually the sexual predator attacking the mother's children. Mothers, be careful who you invite into your home.


Reading about a poor little 3 year-old whose body was located after being reported missing a week ago, I was thinking that whenever a kid goes missing, there always seems to be a live in boyfriend lurking around. Not sure if there are stats to back that up, just an observation.

Posted on: 2017/12/3 22:35
Top


Re: 2 JC Men Among 79 Charged in NJ Child Porn Investigation
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

jerseymom wrote:
Quote:

user1111 wrote:
Surprise, Surprise. They all look alike, nothing to see here.


Child/Teen Victims of Sex Abuse

An estimated 60% of perpetrators of sexual abuse are known to the child but are not family members, e.g., family friends, babysitters, child care providers, neighbors.

About 30% of perpetrators of child sexual abuse are family members.

Only about 10% of perpetrators of child sexual abuse are strangers to the child.

Not all perpetrators are adults—an estimated 23% of reported cases of child sexual abuse are perpetrated by individuals under the age of 18.

Disclosure of sexual abuse is often delayed; children often avoid telling because they are either afraid of a negative reaction from their parents or of being harmed by the abuser. As such, they often delay disclosure until adulthood.

Males tend not to report their victimization, which may affect statistics. Some men even feel societal pressure to be proud of early sexual activity, regardless of whether it was unwanted.

Studies of adults suggest that factors such as the relationship to the perpetrator, age at first incident of abuse, use of physical force, severity of abuse, and demographic variables, such as gender and ethnicity, impact a child’s willingness to disclose abuse.

Source


Thanks for the stats and creating awareness... I think the other person's comment was was coming from a purely racist perspective, as if child abuse and the criminals engaged in this activity are directly connected to one race or gender.

Posted on: 2017/12/3 13:30
Top


Re: Symes / Solomon runoff
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

K-Lo2 wrote:
I was at headquarters from 12 - 4 today. No "day laborers" but thanks for playing.


So what you are saying it is some of her volunteers are being jerks?

The money spent on this Ward E seat truly is obscene. And I generally don't get concerned about campaign funding because that is the ugly nature of the beast... Think about the real good this money could have done for any number of city programs or local charities, especially around this time of year.

It would have been nice if the two candidates sat down and agreed to a spending cap for the runoff election. At the moment I am leaning toward Symes purely for the fact that Solomon loaned or donated so much of his own money to his campaign. That is his business but to me that seems a little out of the norm for this activity and I wonder how he would be managing city budgets and controlling expenses?


Posted on: 2017/12/3 1:22
Top


Re: Beware of Symes Volunteers Infiltrating Your Building
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JPhurst wrote:
I'll just say this.

A candidate doesn't get dozens of volunteers to come out and canvass because they are "pawns of developers." Developers have $ but not the boots that you saw on the streets of Ward E.

Symes is GANGSTA!


You are kidding right with that comment right? There are companies that provide temporary day labor just for these types of things. For all we know they could be union people bussed in for the weekend.

I do not know if that is the case but I would like to think that some of the intrusive behavior is coming from "paid" volunteers rather than some of our neighbors making a royal pain of themselves.

Posted on: 2017/12/2 19:13
Top


Re: Beware of Symes Volunteers Infiltrating Your Building
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


They were also out hanging the doorknob leaflets on the wrought iron private property fences along Grand Street / Warren block. They slipped the pamphlets under my front door (very aggravating)and then decorated the neighborhood sidewalks.

I was tempted to collect them and bring them up to Symes office on Washington and complain, but i was headed over to City Hall event. They seemed to be gone (but it was dark) when I returned home.

Posted on: 2017/12/2 17:42
Top


Re: Symes / Solomon runoff
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

ecinjc wrote:
I’m not smearing Rebecca. It just doesn’t have to be this way. This system where developers run wild and don’t give anything back. This system exists because development interest run campaigns and donate to campaigns. It’s why things don’t change. People who support development interests are both working on her campaign and now a pac is contributing to her campaign. The truth is not a smear. I’m here I’m posting under my own name. I’m a community activist who became hyper engaged in this race when I felt that my ward was being bought by Rebecca Symes. If you want to accuse me of something sign your posts. This is the first time we’ve seen TV ads in a municipal ward race, to my knowledge. You minimize but you know it’s true. I’ll do some research on Stronger Together and I’ll be back with what I find, which I’m sure will confirm what should be obvious. People can say anything, actions matter. Have Rebecca publicly condemn this pac money and dark money and I’ll stop posting Felicia Noth


The money they both raised for this position is obscene. Certainly would like to know where Solomon got his $$$ thousands from?

Posted on: 11/29 17:55
Top


Re: PSE&G: is this even legal?
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home



I would have a hard time believing PSEG would arbitrarily shutoff all the units. They have no idea if there are people in the building on any life support devices etc. Can't imagine why they would make their problem with one customer, a problem for all the other residents. Especially when a Management Co. could provide access.

Potentially sounds like one nice law suit? Save your letters and keep us posted


Posted on: 11/27 14:04
Top


Re: Man Found Stabbed in the Chest in Jersey City (Newark ave between Grove and Erie)
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

Bamb00zle wrote:
Quote:

TheBigGuy wrote:
Quote:

CatDog wrote:
Probably because it would be bad press for them and unless they're involved at all it's not really relevant. If someone gets stabbed outside a residence, should they mention who lives at the residence?


+1 Maybe GrovePath can still stop by the two businesses and ask anyway?


I don’t particularly need to know the name of the DTJC business a crime occurred outside of, but I DO need to know the general vicinity. An address doesn't immediately help me with that - I have to Google it to find the location. Turns out 135 Newark Ave is in the middle of the pedestrian plaza in DTJC’s restaurant row.

I need that information for my own personal safety, so I know where to be careful and where to avoid completely. I need to know: “The stabbing victim was found outside a restaurant located on the downtown Newark Ave pedestrian plaza”, so I can decide if, and when, I go to that vicinity.

Stabbings in the middle of supposedly safe, busy areas of DTJC concern me, as does the absence of news coverage about these crimes. What else doesn’t get reported, and why not…?


Your google search in the first paragraph provided no information, that was not already known. Would love to see the source of your quote because the only location quote I saw was that the incident occurred in the vicinity of 135 Newark Ave.

Maybe you and GrovePath can go down during the day and interview the business owners in the vicinity? It did say early morning... If it helps you, remember nothing good ever happens after midnight.

Posted on: 11/21 20:41
Top


Re: Ward E for Sale - How Dixon $$$ bought Symes a candidacy.
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

ecoindie wrote:
Dan, you don't even live in Ward E. You can't even vote for the special election. Also, I don't appreciate the fact Symes gets bashed on JClist.com, which I suspect would never happen if she was not woman. It's disgusting.


Little early yet to play the "gender card". How do you see sexism in play for this run-off ward election?

Don't all the JC voters have a right to comment on all the city council members or are we just restricted to commenting on at-large candidates and the one from the ward we live in?

Posted on: 11/21 12:54
Top


Re: Man Found Stabbed in the Chest in Jersey City (Newark ave between Grove and Erie)
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

CatDog wrote:
Probably because it would be bad press for them and unless they're involved at all it's not really relevant. If someone gets stabbed outside a residence, should they mention who lives at the residence?


+1 Maybe GrovePath can still stop by the two businesses and ask anyway?

Posted on: 11/21 7:05
Top


Re: Rich Boggiano JSQ/Ward C City Council
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Quote:

JCGuys wrote:
Quote:

tern wrote:
The return of Jim Behrle:
http://jclist.com/modules/profile/userinfo.php?uid=21886

Robin.


He severed his time. I say let him back in if he cuts out the nonsense.


It was not nonsense... his manic postings were designed to stop election conversation by spamming the forum, especially about Ward E election. If he is permitted back...it should be after the run-off.

Posted on: 11/14 7:12
Top



TopTop
(1) 2 3 4 ... 46 »






Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017