Michael makes good points. Somehow the thread has
melted down to quibbling, IMO.

1. People have values. Do you expect them to
pat you on the back when you ridicule those?

2. Kellog hired him (yes, hired) for a specific
purpose. Would it have been different is he
had been photographed fondling a woman's breast
while wearing a General Mills Tee? How?

3. How about if he was doing the deed wearing a
Kellog's tee?

4. Kellog's was founded on a health food image.
If you don't know that, do some research. This
image is part of their stock-in-trade. Did Phelps
help or harm them? IS hitting ithe bong an
example of healthy living? Could he pass for
Ron White? Would K. hire White?

5. Like it or not, almost everyone is judgemental.
Do I pick up that snake or not? Should I buy a
used car from this guy or not? Should I loan this
deadbeat cousin 4,000 dollars? What's the prob.
with this?

Alex, detecting emotional posting rather than
rational. And appreciating Michael's insights.
Well, sometimes... <G>

On Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:50:15 -0600, Chemiker
> wrote:

>2. Kellog hired him (yes, hired) for a specific
>purpose.

That is the crux of this entire issue. Your employer will hire you
and PAY you to do a job. If you can't or won't comply, you WILL be
fired. Kellogg executed THEIR right. They have the ability to
write the check. You have NO reason to demand payment with
noncompliance.

End of sentence.

Find another job.

Note to self.............don't try to pull this type of stunt again.

"Chemiker" > wrote in message
> Alex, detecting emotional posting rather than
> rational. And appreciating Michael's insights.
> Well, sometimes... <G>

How do you figure emotional? Phelps and Kellogg had a contract with
specific terms. He violated those terms. He was let go. Nothing emotional
about it at all.

IMO, that is the way it should be.

"Michael "Dog3"" > wrote in message
>
> . The real
> crux, for me, is the way he was treated. The kid made a mistake.
>

And he paid the consequences that he was aware would happen. Life is like
that. Phelps is taking it well and moving on, but you don't seem to want
to do the same.

When I was a child we had rules and if we broke them, we were punished.
Most rules were not broken more than once. We learned at an early age how
to do a risk/rewards assessment.

On Sun, 8 Feb 2009 00:23:47 -0500, "Ed Pawlowski" >
wrote:

>
>"Chemiker" > wrote in message
>> Alex, detecting emotional posting rather than
>> rational. And appreciating Michael's insights.
>> Well, sometimes... <G>
>
>How do you figure emotional? Phelps and Kellogg had a contract with
>specific terms. He violated those terms. He was let go. Nothing emotional
>about it at all.
>
>IMO, that is the way it should be.
>

He wasn't let go. His contract won't be renewed.


--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

On Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:50:15 -0600, Chemiker wrote:


> 4. Kellog's was founded on a health food image. If you don't know that,
> do some research.

Health food?!?! What kind of 'health food' has Kellogs *ever* produced?!

On 08 Feb 2009 05:10:32 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>The real
>crux, for me, is the way he was treated. The kid made a mistake.

Since no one here was personally involved we can only assume how he
was treated.

Time will tell....let's see how many future deals he picks up. While
sucking on a bong....he blew millions.

Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> The issue for me isn't the actual monetary compensation. Phelps is not
> going to get the compensation from Kelloggs and acknowledges it. The real
> crux, for me, is the way he was treated. The kid made a mistake.
>
> Michael
>

Seems to me he was treated in a upfront business like manner. No mixed
messages or stall tactics. No grandstanding on Kellog's part. Michael
Phelps certainly seemed to take it better and more professionally than
you. How come?

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> "Chemiker" > wrote in message
>> Alex, detecting emotional posting rather than
>> rational. And appreciating Michael's insights.
>> Well, sometimes... <G>
>
> How do you figure emotional? Phelps and Kellogg had a contract with
> specific terms. He violated those terms. He was let go. Nothing emotional
> about it at all.
>
> IMO, that is the way it should be.
>
>
I think he meant Michael (Dog3) being overly emotional over this. That
is how I interpreted it. Otherwise, I agree Michael Phelps acted as
professional and businesslike as Kellog's did. Seems pretty reasonable
to me.

On Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:21:10 +0000 (UTC), Xenon Engineering
> wrote:

>On Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:50:15 -0600, Chemiker wrote:
>
>
>> 4. Kellog's was founded on a health food image. If you don't know that,
>> do some research.
>
>Health food?!?! What kind of 'health food' has Kellogs *ever* produced?!
>
You are a *young* little whipper snapper. GIYF, try it sometime.
http://www.kellogghistory.com/history.html



--
I never worry about diets. The only carrots that
interest me are the number of carats in a diamond.

Mae West

Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> "Chemiker" > wrote in message
>> Alex, detecting emotional posting rather than
>> rational. And appreciating Michael's insights.
>> Well, sometimes... <G>
>
> How do you figure emotional? Phelps and Kellogg had a contract with
> specific terms. He violated those terms. He was let go. Nothing emotional
> about it at all.

That isn't exactly accurate. Google is a wonderful thing. It seems that
his contract with Kelloggs was due to expire in February. It is not
being renewed, but they weren't planning to renew it anyway. Some of the
morality clauses are so vague that they end up in court. But that is not
the case here. He was not fired. They just aren't renewing it.

Dave Smith wrote:

...
> Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> > "Chemiker" > wrote in message
> >> Alex, detecting emotional posting rather than
> >> rational. And appreciating Michael's insights.
> >> Well, sometimes... <G>
> >
> > How do you figure emotional? Phelps and Kellogg had a contract with
> > specific terms. He violated those terms. He was let go. Nothing
emotional
> > about it at all.
>
> That isn't exactly accurate. Google is a wonderful thing. It seems that
> his contract with Kelloggs was due to expire in February. It is not
> being renewed, but they weren't planning to renew it anyway. Some of the
> morality clauses are so vague that they end up in court. But that is not
> the case here. He was not fired. They just aren't renewing it.
>


Wow, Dave, you mean the media didn't DO their JOB when making all these
accusations and such...!!!???

That makes the whole Kellogg's thang "moot"...but natcherly the moralistic
windbags had to "make hay" outta the whole incident.


--
Best
Greg

Michael "Dog3" wrote:
> Goomba > :
> in rec.food.cooking
>
>> Michael "Dog3" wrote:
>>
>>> The issue for me isn't the actual monetary compensation. Phelps is
>>> not going to get the compensation from Kelloggs and acknowledges it.
>>> The real crux, for me, is the way he was treated. The kid made a
>>> mistake.
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>> Seems to me he was treated in a upfront business like manner. No mixed
>> messages or stall tactics. No grandstanding on Kellog's part. Michael
>> Phelps certainly seemed to take it better and more professionally than
>> you. How come?
>
> Taking it? I was responding to the OP with my thoughts. It is what it is.
> You've had your say but still seem to be interested. Why is that?
>
> Michael
>
>
Because what you say makes no sense to me. You seem to be saying that he
was treated badly, when in fact he was not.

Gregory Morrow wrote:



> But what is really disgusting is that people are so quick to give him a pass
> on this one.

What is really disgusting is not that many people don't care about
Phelps' bong, but the stubborn persistence of booze-soaked, cross-eyed,
religion-addled republican "values". Red-nose lush family values.

I have long wondered whether bone-head religions cause heavy drinking,
or whether heavy drinking causes bone-head religions. It might be sort
of a mix, back and forth, in a vicious and endless causal circle.

> Phelps, like it or not should realise he has a responsibility to
> set an example just because of the mere fact he is a public figure.

Phelps' example is fine: He appeared to be using the bong perfectly
correctly.

As for Kellogg's, I had some Nutrigrain cereal bars in the cabinet,
which I cut up and mixed into the bird seed. The downtown Chicago birds
will think it's a nice treat. And I wrote Kellogg's and told them where
I put the Nutrigrain, and where to shove their prissy religious and
republican horse crap.

The whole thread's off topic, but I hope this helps.

Cuthbert Thistlethwaite wrote:

>
> Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>But what is really disgusting is that people are so quick to give him a pass
>>on this one.
>
>
> What is really disgusting is not that many people don't care about
> Phelps' bong, but the stubborn persistence of booze-soaked, cross-eyed,
> religion-addled republican "values". Red-nose lush family values.
>
> I have long wondered whether bone-head religions cause heavy drinking,
> or whether heavy drinking causes bone-head religions. It might be sort
> of a mix, back and forth, in a vicious and endless causal circle.

From a strictly medical standpoint I've seen lots of people drink
themselves to death. In point of fact, to kill yourself with weed you'd
need about a three hundred pound bale, hoisted approximately 50 feet up
then have it dropped directly onto your head.

>
>
>>Phelps, like it or not should realise he has a responsibility to
>>set an example just because of the mere fact he is a public figure.
>
>
> Phelps' example is fine: He appeared to be using the bong perfectly
> correctly.
>
> As for Kellogg's, I had some Nutrigrain cereal bars in the cabinet,
> which I cut up and mixed into the bird seed. The downtown Chicago birds
> will think it's a nice treat. And I wrote Kellogg's and told them where
> I put the Nutrigrain, and where to shove their prissy religious and
> republican horse crap.
>
> The whole thread's off topic, but I hope this helps.

What I wonder is exactly who is making their purchasing decisions based
on dumbass crap like this? Am I more likely to buy cornflakes because
Phelps is on the box? Uh, nope. Am I less likely to buy cornflakes
because he was photographed doing bong hits at a party? Nope.

Phelps is irrelevant to me, except that I feel sorry that he's been hung
out to dry for something that I suspect that a whopping percentage of
Americans under 50 would have to cop to, hand up, in front of God.

I'd much rather know who is blowing off health inspections, ignoring
reports of salmonellla contamination and doesn't worry much about rodent
droppings in their product.

Kathleen wrote:

> Cuthbert Thistlethwaite wrote:

> > Gregory Morrow wrote:


> >>But what is really disgusting is that people are so quick to give him a pass
> >>on this one.

> > What is really disgusting is not that many people don't care about
> > Phelps' bong, but the stubborn persistence of booze-soaked, cross-eyed,
> > religion-addled republican "values". Red-nose lush family values.

> > I have long wondered whether bone-head religions cause heavy drinking,
> > or whether heavy drinking causes bone-head religions. It might be sort
> > of a mix, back and forth, in a vicious and endless causal circle.

> From a strictly medical standpoint I've seen lots of people drink
> themselves to death. In point of fact, to kill yourself with weed you'd
> need about a three hundred pound bale, hoisted approximately 50 feet up
> then have it dropped directly onto your head.


Ha! You got that right! Yet, if Phelps had been photographed with a
case of stoopid booze under one arm and a stoopid Bible under the other,
it would add to his legend in the twisted little minds of the
republican-values morons.


> >>Phelps, like it or not should realise he has a responsibility to
> >>set an example just because of the mere fact he is a public figure.


> > Phelps' example is fine: He appeared to be using the bong perfectly
> > correctly.


> > As for Kellogg's, I had some Nutrigrain cereal bars in the cabinet,
> > which I cut up and mixed into the bird seed. The downtown Chicago birds
> > will think it's a nice treat. And I wrote Kellogg's and told them where
> > I put the Nutrigrain, and where to shove their prissy religious and
> > republican horse crap.


> What I wonder is exactly who is making their purchasing decisions based
> on dumbass crap like this? Am I more likely to buy cornflakes because
> Phelps is on the box? Uh, nope. Am I less likely to buy cornflakes
> because he was photographed doing bong hits at a party? Nope.


> Phelps is irrelevant to me, except that I feel sorry that he's been hung
> out to dry for something that I suspect that a whopping percentage of
> Americans under 50 would have to cop to, hand up, in front of God.


Right, their endorsements had nothing to do with my grocery list. They
have, however, managed to get themselves kicked off the list
altogether. I am now entirely unlikely to purchase Kellogg products
because they have demonstrated themselves to be willing stooges of the
republican retards and the superstitious religions.


> I'd much rather know who is blowing off health inspections, ignoring
> reports of salmonellla contamination and doesn't worry much about rodent
> droppings in their product.


You can forget about it. We can all forget about it. To the economic
equation, sickened and killed consumers are just an "externality."
Irrelevant, like a sawn-down rain forest, which makes way for a palm-oil
plantation so someone can make some more money.

1) Pot should have been legalized decades ago.

2) How is it that all of these oh-so-pure media types--I like "moralistic
windbags"-- know what a bong looks like?

3) The jerk who took his picture and SOLD IT to the media ought to be
identified by name so that s/he can be known for the slimeball that s/he is
and ostracized by his/her peers.

>> My message to the USOC, IOC and WADA is to *get* involved, and if
>> necessary, re-test (even though according to everyone he has never
>> failed a dope test) while in competition. And if necessary, start to
>> yank medals.

Who IS this flaming twit?

Since when does smoking pot constitute cheating at athletics through
performance-enhancing drug use?

Yanking medals indeed. What a bitch.

Kathleen wrote:
> Phelps is irrelevant to me, except that I feel sorry that he's been
> hung out to dry for something that I suspect that a whopping
> percentage of Americans under 50 would have to cop to, hand up, in
> front of God.

Speaking as someone who graduated from high school in 1971, I'm willing to
bet that a FAR HIGHER percentage of people in the 50-65 range would qualify.

Cuthbert Thistlethwaite wrote:
>
> As for Kellogg's, I had some Nutrigrain cereal bars in the cabinet,
> which I cut up and mixed into the bird seed. The downtown Chicago
> birds will think it's a nice treat. And I wrote Kellogg's and told
> them where I put the Nutrigrain, and where to shove their prissy
> religious and republican horse crap.
>
> The whole thread's off topic, but I hope this helps.

When Centrum dropped Billy Jean King because she was outed, I dropped
Centrum. Never bought another vitamin of theirs, and never will.

I think I'll be contacting Kellog and telling them the same thing.

Janet wrote:




> When Centrum dropped Billy Jean King because she was outed, I dropped
> Centrum. Never bought another vitamin of theirs, and never will.

> I think I'll be contacting Kellog and telling them the same thing.


You were right then, and you're right now.

Permit me to help:

Kellogg Company
Consumer Marketing Dept.
2 Hamblin Ave E
Battle Creek, MI 49017

Janet wrote on Mon, 9 Feb 2009 10:20:42 -0500:

> Cuthbert Thistlethwaite wrote:
>>
>> As for Kellogg's, I had some Nutrigrain cereal bars in the
>> cabinet, which I cut up and mixed into the bird seed. The
>> downtown Chicago birds will think it's a nice treat. And I
>> wrote Kellogg's and told them where I put the Nutrigrain, and
>> where to shove their prissy religious and republican horse
>> crap.
>>
>> The whole thread's off topic, but I hope this helps.

> When Centrum dropped Billy Jean King because she was outed, I
> dropped Centrum. Never bought another vitamin of theirs, and
> never will.

>I think I'll be contacting Kellog and telling them the same thing.

You'll be much better for both actions :-)


--

James Silverton
Potomac, Maryland

Email, with obvious alterations: not.jim.silverton.at.verizon.not

Kathleen wrote:

> From a strictly medical standpoint I've seen lots of people drink
> themselves to death. In point of fact, to kill yourself with weed you'd
> need about a three hundred pound bale, hoisted approximately 50 feet up
> then have it dropped directly onto your head.

Having lived through the 60s and 70s I was a witness to the increase in
illicit drug use. I knew lots of people who drank, smoked pot and did
other drugs. I never had any use for hard drugs or the people who did
them. It was a one way trip downhill for most of them. A few of them
ODed. The heavy drinkers messed up their lives almost as bad. The pot
smokers did okay. They went on and had successful lives. Most of them
gave it up. Some still smoke occasionally,



> What I wonder is exactly who is making their purchasing decisions based
> on dumbass crap like this? Am I more likely to buy cornflakes because
> Phelps is on the box? Uh, nope. Am I less likely to buy cornflakes
> because he was photographed doing bong hits at a party? Nope.

When you have a really crappy product you have to resort to desperate
measures to market it, like getting a celebrity to endorse it. I can't
figure it out. Having some celebrity endorse the product does nothing to
influence me. I sure don't rush out and buy a product because a
celebrity is getting paid to endorse it. I know they are doing it for
the money.

This Michael Phelps "scandal" is just ridiculous. I never could figure
out why athletes, professional or otherwise, are supposed to "role
models" for our youth.
Why does anybody care what Phelps does at a party?
He enjoys smoking pot like millions of other Americans. I think he
probably is a regular smoker, judging from the picture he is adept at
handling a bong, and beginners don't usually start with a bong.
This guy is a swimmer, and that is all that he does. He swims for a
living!
Same thing for baseball players, etc. Who cares if they take steroids?
All they do is play ball!
It's not as if they do anything remotely important or make a
significant contribution to society.
After reading many headlines in the news media recently, it is obvious
to me that if our youth needs role models, they should not be looking
at athletes.


Darren

Darren said...

> This Michael Phelps "scandal" is just ridiculous. I never could figure
> out why athletes, professional or otherwise, are supposed to "role
> models" for our youth.
> Why does anybody care what Phelps does at a party?
> He enjoys smoking pot like millions of other Americans. I think he
> probably is a regular smoker, judging from the picture he is adept at
> handling a bong, and beginners don't usually start with a bong.
> This guy is a swimmer, and that is all that he does. He swims for a
> living!
> Same thing for baseball players, etc. Who cares if they take steroids?
> All they do is play ball!
> It's not as if they do anything remotely important or make a
> significant contribution to society.
> After reading many headlines in the news media recently, it is obvious
> to me that if our youth needs role models, they should not be looking
> at athletes.
>
>
> Darren


Pop Pop was my role model. He was a judge. Tall and strong (used to swim
with Johnny Weissmuller, Tarzan) and a stern grandfather until he got on a
fishing boat, then the curses started flying!!! Shocked the heck outta
me!!!

Andy

On Feb 10, 2:10*am, "Janet" > wrote:
> 1) Pot should have been legalized decades ago.
>
> 2) How is it that all of these oh-so-pure media types--I like "moralistic
> windbags"-- know what a bong looks like?
>
> 3) The jerk who took his picture and SOLD IT to the media ought to be
> identified by name so that s/he can be known for the slimeball that s/he is
> and ostracized by his/her peers.

You are a jerk.
can't you get it through your pot head that smoking pot is against the
law?

--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

Tell me what you eat and I'll tell you who you are.

Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin

On Feb 10, 3:00*am, Andy > wrote:
> Darren said...
>
>
>
>
>
> > This Michael Phelps "scandal" is just ridiculous. I never could figure
> > out why athletes, professional or otherwise, are supposed to "role
> > models" for our youth.
> > Why does anybody care what Phelps does at a party?
> > He enjoys smoking pot like millions of other Americans. I think he
> > probably is a regular smoker, judging from the picture he is adept at
> > handling a bong, and beginners don't usually start with a bong.
> > This guy is a swimmer, and that is all that he does. He swims for a
> > living!
> > Same thing for baseball players, etc. Who cares if they take steroids?
> > All they do is play ball!
> > It's not as if they do anything remotely important or make a
> > significant contribution to society.
> > After reading many headlines in the news media recently, it is obvious
> > to me that if our youth needs role models, they should not be looking
> > at athletes.
>
> > Darren
>
> Pop Pop was my role model. He was a judge. Tall and strong (used to swim
> with Johnny Weissmuller, Tarzan) and a stern grandfather until he got on a
> fishing boat, then the curses started flying!!! Shocked the heck outta
> me!!!
>
> Andy- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

You *** ****!

--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

Tell me what you eat and I'll tell you who you are.

Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin

> You *** ****!


Whore troll!

Andy > wrote in :

>> You *** ****!
>
>
> Whore troll!



Andy,

It's a full moon.

Posts from ****ant, ineffectual, impotent, little individuals like kirkland
(forging me) are going to be rife over the next couple of days while they are
affected by the Moons gravitational pull....... and probably a lot of their
own pulling.

Several options.........

Completely ignore them.


Use Blinky's formula to get rid of them.



--
Peter Lucas
Brisbane
Australia

Tell me what you eat and I'll tell you who you are.

Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin

PeterL wrote:
> On Feb 10, 2:10 am, "Janet" > wrote:
>> 1) Pot should have been legalized decades ago.
>>
>> 2) How is it that all of these oh-so-pure media types--I like "moralistic
>> windbags"-- know what a bong looks like?
>>
>> 3) The jerk who took his picture and SOLD IT to the media ought to be
>> identified by name so that s/he can be known for the slimeball that s/he is
>> and ostracized by his/her peers.
>
> You are a jerk.
> can't you get it through your pot head that smoking pot is against the
> law?

And surely you can get it through your head that laws can be changed.
Booze was illegal in the US for a while. The law changed. Pot is
illegal now. There is no good reason for it. If it is a matter of
morality, like the Prohibition of liquor was, then legalizing one vice
sets a precedent. Opening stores on Sundays used to be illegal too.
That law changed.

"Cuthbert Thistlethwaite wrote:

> I have long wondered whether bone-head religions cause heavy drinking,
> or whether heavy drinking causes bone-head religions. It might be sort
> of a mix, back and forth, in a vicious and endless causal circle.

Billions of teetotaling fanatical Muslims provide the obvious datum that
bone-head religions and drinking do not have to go hand-in-hand.

Bob
"Death To Fanatics!"

On 08 Feb 2009 22:25:44 GMT, Michael "Dog3" wrote:

> "Gregory Morrow" >
> m: in rec.food.cooking
>
>>
>> That makes the whole Kellogg's thang "moot"...but natcherly the
>> moralistic windbags had to "make hay" outta the whole incident.
>
> I stil think they should throw the "moralistic windbags" a crumb and
> allow them to flog Phelps in the town square. Can you just see it?
> Phelps strung up in his Speedos surrounded by a bunch of pinch faced old
> biddies, and rotund balding men shaking their fat, sausage like fingers at
> him?
>
> Michael

....and a few slackers hanging back of the crowd smoking a joint.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 08:02:00 -0600, Cuthbert Thistlethwaite wrote:

> Gregory Morrow wrote:
>
>
>> But what is really disgusting is that people are so quick to give him a pass
>> on this one.
>
> What is really disgusting is not that many people don't care about
> Phelps' bong, but the stubborn persistence of booze-soaked, cross-eyed,
> religion-addled republican "values". Red-nose lush family values.
>
> I have long wondered whether bone-head religions cause heavy drinking,
> or whether heavy drinking causes bone-head religions. It might be sort
> of a mix, back and forth, in a vicious and endless causal circle.
>

now, now. to be fair, it's not drinking that is the fundamentalists'
secret vice. more often it's icky homosex. meth seems to be optional.

your pal,
ted

On Mon, 09 Feb 2009 08:18:16 -0600, Kathleen wrote:
>
> From a strictly medical standpoint I've seen lots of people drink
> themselves to death. In point of fact, to kill yourself with weed you'd
> need about a three hundred pound bale, hoisted approximately 50 feet up
> then have it dropped directly onto your head.
>

can you get high from that?

your pal,
blake

Dave Smith wrote:

> And surely you can get it through your head that laws can be changed.
> Booze was illegal in the US for a while. The law changed. Pot is
> illegal now. There is no good reason for it.

I hope somehow they'll come to their senses someday soon.
It's like pulling teeth even to let people use it medically. Get
real.

nancy

In article >,
says...
>
> Dave Smith >
> m: in rec.food.cooking
>
> > Dave to one of the PeterL people:
>
> > And surely you can get it through your head that laws can be changed.
> > Booze was illegal in the US for a while. The law changed. Pot is
> > illegal now. There is no good reason for it. If it is a matter of
> > morality, like the Prohibition of liquor was, then legalizing one vice
> > sets a precedent. Opening stores on Sundays used to be illegal too.
> > That law changed.
>
> Exactly. A lot of it has to do with tax revenues also. When the coffers
> start to run dry a new source of tax revenue needs to be found. Voila,
> alcohol was then legal. When that was taxed to death something else
> needed to be found. It goes on and on. I suspect when government finds a
> way to regulate weed sales the sale of it will become legal and a whole
> new source of tax revenue will be generated. They'd better be quick. Tax
> revenue on tobacco sales is shrinking because fewer people are smoking.
>
> Michael
>
> --
> ?He who does not understand your silence will probably not understand
> your words.?
> ~Elbert Hubbard
>
> You can find me at: - michael at lonergan dot us dot com

Here is a nice chart showing the lethal dosage for varying drugs and
alcohol. Alcohol as it turns out is fairly toxic stuff.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2249/...9588a65d_o.jpg

In article >,
"Michael \"Dog3\"" > wrote:

<snip>

> Exactly. A lot of it has to do with tax revenues also. When the coffers
> start to run dry a new source of tax revenue needs to be found. Voila,
> alcohol was then legal. When that was taxed to death something else
> needed to be found. It goes on and on. I suspect when government finds a
> way to regulate weed sales the sale of it will become legal and a whole
> new source of tax revenue will be generated. They'd better be quick. Tax
> revenue on tobacco sales is shrinking because fewer people are smoking.
>
> Michael
>
Tax is an issue. Problem is that it takes skills that few people have to
grow and process good tobacco. (Yeah, the idea of "good tobacco" strikes
me as strange too.)

Virtually anybody is capable of growing good ganja. Make it legal to
grow it and I don't think there'd be any effective way to tax it. I'd
gladly pay such a tax. Just don't send me to jail. Please don't.

Regards,
Dave W.

(Nice Hubbard quote, Michael.)

> “He who does not understand your silence will probably not understand
> your words.”
> ~Elbert Hubbard

In article >,
"Janet" > wrote:

> >> My message to the USOC, IOC and WADA is to *get* involved, and if
> >> necessary, re-test (even though according to everyone he has never
> >> failed a dope test) while in competition. And if necessary, start to
> >> yank medals.
>
> Who IS this flaming twit?
>
> Since when does smoking pot constitute cheating at athletics through
> performance-enhancing drug use?
>
> Yanking medals indeed. What a bitch.

You can thank Greg Morrow for this one. He hates her so much that he
spreads her words, without her permission, I assume, to his newsgroups.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

On Sun, 8 Feb 2009 12:21:10 +0000 (UTC), Xenon Engineering
> wrote:

>On Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:50:15 -0600, Chemiker wrote:
>
>
>> 4. Kellog's was founded on a health food image. If you don't know that,
>> do some research.
>
>Health food?!?! What kind of 'health food' has Kellogs *ever* produced?!
>
>
As I suggested, do some research. That is, if your cptr has a search
engine installed or otherwise available. W. K. Kellog was a 7th Day
Adventist and was very much into "healthy" eating. One of the
big deals of the time was how to clean and purge the digestive
tract of various noxious toxins. He surmised that cereal grains
could be used as a daily "cleanser" of the bowel. His first product
was flaked corn, at his home in Battle Creek MI. One of his earliest
packaging designs for corn flakes carried the banner logo "Sanitas"
at the top. See:

http://www.kellogghistory.com/timeline.html

Alex

Dan Abel wrote:

> In article >,
> "Janet" > wrote:
>
> > >> My message to the USOC, IOC and WADA is to *get* involved, and if
> > >> necessary, re-test (even though according to everyone he has never
> > >> failed a dope test) while in competition. And if necessary, start to
> > >> yank medals.
> >
> > Who IS this flaming twit?
> >
> > Since when does smoking pot constitute cheating at athletics through
> > performance-enhancing drug use?
> >
> > Yanking medals indeed. What a bitch.
>
> You can thank Greg Morrow for this one. He hates her so much that he
> spreads her words, without her permission, I assume, to his newsgroups.
>


Of *course* I do, Dan...she's just *so* easy to mock, donchyaknow...and many
others agree with me.

:-)


--
Best
Greg