so, when i supported trump's withdrawal, i didn't mean a half-assed withdrawal or a redeployment to protect the oil, although nobody should be surprised by this, as it is more or less what he said from the start.

shifting from "protect the kurds" to "protect the oil" just makes the existing illegal occupation that much more illegal of an occupation. they've just dropped the pretext.

so, i would call on the president to keep his promise and uphold his mandate to end the war and withdraw all of his troops from syria.

i would also call on the united states congress to pass a carbon transition plan that makes this kind of nonsense a thing of the past.

actually, she already appears to have a title of "special advisor to the prime minister". which means what, exactly?

between mclellan, carr, murray, wilkinson, sajjan and qualtrough the west seems covered, to me.

seems like a tempest in a teacup.

and, if they have to do something, the best thing to do is to appoint anne mclellan somewhere.

the west a made a choice to be in opposition.

let them live with it.

actually, i think the liberals should make it a point to exclude alberta and saskatchewan from cabinet, as a consequence of their voting choices.

alberta doesn't deserve a consolation prize, here - they voted their cabinet ministers out and should have to deal with it. and, saskatchewan just voted out ralph. what a bunch of idiots.

the west can be and should be represented via the liberals in british columbia and manitoba.

maybe they'll make a better choice, next time.

i've known people that actually smoke three grams, per average, every day.

at the height of it, they can barely tie their own shoes. i had one friend that got addicted to smoking up and jerking off.

and, there's a pattern - after a year or two, they end up born-again christians or yoga instructors or something. they go totally straight edge; they don't touch the stuff.

people will tell me things like "but, our market surveys suggested that people smoke, on average, three grams a day".

we just went over this with the bradley effect.

i think it's a pretty sad reflection of society, but i think everybody knows it's true - if you call up people on a saturday night and get them to answer your survey, they're probably going to exaggerate the amount of pot they've smoked. they don't want you to think they're a prude, or a loser, or something. as they answer your survey on a saturday night...

so, those surveys are of limited value due to the presence of an obvious bias: nobody wants to admit they don't smoke pot at all, and pretty much everybody is going to exaggerate the amount they've smoked in the past. it's sad, but it's true.

the actual sales data is far more instructive, and nobody should be surprised about the disconnect.

i ended up shivering in the blankets all afternoon before finally getting up around 15:00 and taking a good three hour shower.

did it help?

when i was in there, yes, but it didn't warm the apartment up much.

i've sent him a note reminding him of what the law says, so he can't say he got the case unexpectedly. but, the heat has not turned on. so, what option do i have but to sue?

why am i constantly surrounded by these irresponsible assholes and hopeless, lawless idiots? the law is crystal clear. this shouldn't be necessary - he should just fucking do it.

he still has a week to surprise me, but i'm not counting on it.

i slept a lot this week, when i wanted to be working. what can i do? i'm going to get up soon, make some eggs (hopefully that helps a little) and try to get to work.

but, i'm still cold.

so, i might have to take another hot shower...

yeah, if you look at the way the government approached this, the model they used was tobacco. 'cause you smoke both of them, i guess.

but, the way most people use it isn't even comparable to beer. it's more like hard liquor. smoking a joint after work isn't like having a beer, it's like having four beers - or taking a few shots.

people are going to argue that it didn't cut into the black market, and i don't have any data to argue for that one way or the other, but, based on what i saw, it was obvious that the government missed the mark on what to expect.

if you set up a system that expects people to buy it daily in large quantities and it turns out they but it monthly, or biyearly, and usually in small quantities, then, yeah, you should expect to see some major losses.

you basically can't exist in day-to-day life as a pothead; even if you binge, you have to back off fairly frequently. the major users are all kids (that can't buy legally anyways.), unemployed/disabled people or people working in illegal or unusual industries (from prostitution to sound art).

there should be an across the board re-evaluation that tries to fit the data to vodka instead of to tobacco.

https://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/cannabis-market-proving-costly-for-province-no-sign-of-turning-a-profit

well, that was a lot of sleep today - another 7-8 hours. i wanted to be productive this week, but am just shutting down and falling asleep in the cold weather. as mentioned, i'm tired of this guy's negligence and am sick of chasing him around to get him to follow the law. right now, it looks like i'm filing for an order to maintain the heat about 20 degrees, on the first.

i'm still woozy, but i think i'm at least awake.

so, let's see if i can get through the next batch of stuff. it's about 15 more html files, and then it should pick up.

it was another early crash last night - around 21:00 - after some questionable, if mild, odours from somewhere.

i was up around 2:00 and have made it through the first day of november, which was a lot of html files, and one of the more time consuming tasks.

i'm stopping to eat and making some coffee, but i think i'm destined for a more healthy nap afterwards.