Advertisement

Of course, it does

February 1, 2022

This is the kind of conclusion that you’d have to be high not to have figured out for yourself by now, but a new study by Canadian researchers found that smoking pot makes you dumber.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/gwendolynsims/2022/01/31/new-poll-70-say-its-time-to-accept-that-covid-is-here-to-stay-and-move-on-with-our-lives-n1554821

Research found that while “getting stoned” may last for only a few hours, the active ingredient THC can be stored in body fat and gradually released into the bloodstream for months, impairing cognitive abilities long after pot use, even if you use it just once or twice a week. And today’s marijuana has up to six times more THC than during the hippie/stoner era of the ‘60s, so...dumber than hippies!

The abilities most impaired were those of learning from what one hears and remembering things, focusing, paying attention and processing information. There were also smaller reductions in executive functioning, decision making, inhibitory processes and flexibility.

(Anyone who lived through the ‘60s might also add that it can impair your fashion sense and personal hygiene.)

Worse, as Athena Thorne at PJ Media points out at the link, a 2017 study linked today’s super-powerful pot to paranoia, panic attacks, mood swings and other mental problems, particularly among young, frequent users. CBS also reported that since Colorado legalized marijuana, the state has seen a big uptick in pot-related ER visits.

Remember when legalized pot was sold to us on the promise that it was perfectly harmless? A number of blue states fell for that one. I wonder if it’s a coincidence that after they legalized pot and people started suffering from longterm cognitive impairment, their governments just got bluer and bluer?

I wrote yesterday about a new poll that showed President Biden’s disapproval on some major issues was as high as 69%. I wondered where it could possibly go from there. Well, the latest Rasmussen survey may give us a clue.

https://www.westernjournal.com/biden-doomed-50-likely-voters-now-support-impeaching-potus/

The survey found that 50% of likely voters now back impeaching Biden for his handling of the border and Afghanistan, with only 45% opposed. Even more shocking, 50% of blacks and even 34% of Democrats want Biden impeached.

I’m sure the media, if they mention this poll at all, will try to spin it as biased and inaccurate. But I think it can more likely be explained by listening to this Biden voter, a longtime Democrat who campaigned hard for Biden and even appeared in a Biden victory video. He’s so furious about how Biden’s governing that he went on Fox News to complain about it. That can’t be good news for the Democrats.

https://www.westernjournal.com/watch-biden-voter-turns-fox-news-drops-brutal-truth-bomb-potus/

And with the recent revelations about the secret air flights of illegal immigrants and that the DOJ has been investigating Hunter Biden’s business ties with China, an incoming GOP Congress could have some actual grounds for impeachment, which would be novel these days.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10460457/DOJ-issued-subpoena-JP-Morgan-Hunter-Bidens-transactions-Bank-China-2019.html

FYI: Even the New York Times (not the Post, the Times!) is finally looking into Hunter’s deals.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/politico-hunter-biden-business-dealings-investigated-new-york-times

One thing I expect this will do, however, is put the kibosh on those rumors of Biden getting Kamala Harris out of his Administration by nominating her to the Supreme Court. If there’s a growing chance of his impeachment, and a majority of Americans demanding it, the thought of her being next in line is probably his best job security.

Thanks to Robert S. for this thought-provoking idea...

Nancy Pelosi has announced that she will run for another term of office. I can see her making this announcement so as not to be a lame duck Speaker of the House. But I wonder if there isn't more afoot here. If Pelosi runs for another term, and wins, she can still retire after the first of the year. If she retires, then Governor Newsom, her nephew, would be able to appoint Nancy's replacement. So he would be able to appoint another Pelosi family member to fill the seat. Or maybe himself. Just a wild thought from Texas.

From the Gov.

Thanks for writing, Robert. Gov. Newsom is not technically Nancy Pelosi's nephew, though the two families were once related through marriage. There's no blood tie, but certainly a political one. And it's true that if she retired after being re-elected, he would get to appoint her replacement. That might be another member of the Pelosi family, or someone else entirely.

One benefit of running again is that Pelosi will get to fundraise a giant "war chest," whether she ends up keeping her seat or not. One downside is that as a candidate, she will likely face more scrutiny over the outrageous stock market gains she and her husband have made while she's been in office. It shows in her eyes that she's uncomfortable about being in the hot seat over that, and for good reason. But ego sometimes trumps risk-avoidance. Besides, she'll manage --- because she's doing it "for the children."

....................

Here's a question about Ashli Babbitt from reader Glen G:

I have been supporting Ashli all along. Her getting shot in this manner was dreadfully wrong. But I don't understand the point of this story. Mainly speaks of her trying to stop the process she was in, and then goes through the broken window. How's is that supposed to be understood as good evidence for her?

From the Gov.

Glen, Aaron's point is that his wife was trying to stop the riot, not join in, and that when the situation got to be too intense, she tried to go through the window not to interfere with the election certification process but simply to get to what she thought would be a safer spot. Any evidence of that --- such as the videos, her law enforcement training, and the testimony of those who knew her --- would be considered exculpatory.