Scotch is good stuff

Scotch is such a deep hole to dive into that it's hard to figure out what to buy sometimes

well the obvious candidates are Glenlivet, Glenfiddich, Laphroaig...

I just recently finished a bottle of Glenmorangie as well. Not bad.

never tried that one

Especially considering it was a $40 bottle with some tasting glasses included

i like the peaty stuff

not bad

i used to bartend so i find it hard to justify paying full price for this stuff

do you like Japanese whiskey?

I've only ever tried one, at my Uncle's house last Thanksgiving

I don't remember the name on the label

I was also the one to open the bottle, because he doesn't drink hard liquor but he was given a whole bunch when he retired as gifts

Same with a bottle of Green Label Johnny Walker and a few other bottles he had

Yamazaki, Hibiki are prob the most common ones, both super good

I'm going to have to see if the liquor store I go to has those so I can try them.

but i like weird shit like Fernet Branca

and Pernod etc..

most liquor stores will have those brands of Japanese whiskey for sure

I've never really looked for Japanese whiskey, so I don't know. I also haven't looked that hard outside the Scotch and Irish Whisky aisle at the liquor store I've been going to since I moved out here from Maine

Selection in Maine was pretty limited because liquor stores were stocked way too much with beer

where is 'here'?

Colorado

man i spent some time in Bar Harbor

it was fucking awesome

Acadia National Park is a really pretty place too

Pretty though Maine is, there's more to do here in Colorado

not to mention more people around my age

hehe i get ya (420 wink wink)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GGEsN1v9cZA

"The 1946 case of Marsh v Alabama was very similar to what is going on today. a private company essentially controlled a town in Alabama (not literally, but most land and public services were either owned by or paid off by this company.) and Marsh was spreading religious fliers and this falls under her 1st amendment right. Now since the land she was doing this on was owned by this company and they had a policy against this they had her arrested. since she was arrested for her first amendment rights this case was taken to the supreme court. The company argued that since it was private and this happened on their property that they had the right to have her arrested. However in a 5-3 ruling the supreme court ruled that "ownership does not always mean absolute dominion." and "that the more an owner opens his property up to the public in general, the more his rights are circumscribed by the statutory and constitutional rights of those who are invited in.". Now how is this relevant? Most of these companies that are banning and censoring people are based in California which is a US state which also means that this ruling applies to them as well. So a good lawyer could argue that since these companies have a monopoly on speech, are US based and their platforms are publicly available for anyone to use, that they are violating the rights of US citizens by banning or censoring them on grounds of speech or beliefs. This might only have an effect in the US at first, but less censorship will be a good thing for people being able to speak out against what is happening and could lead to less censorship overall if its handled correctly."

Actually, I can't

I work for a Defense contractor and I'm under investigation for Top Secret clearance

Since weed is still illegal at the federal level, I can't partake if I want to get that

"i was denied top secret clearance"
"why"
"i smoked weed."
".....k"

Grenade, that's an interesting snippet

I'm gonna have to do some looking into that

its from one of the comments

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marsh_v._Alabama

oh shit, Top Secret clearance? what do you know about the Denver Airport

Joey: nothing. I don't have the clearance yet.