311
Government Reopening Hits a Snag After Rand Paul Throws a Wrench in Shutdown Deal
(dailyboulder.com)
this post was submitted on 12 Nov 2025
311 points (97.3% liked)
News
33127 readers
3910 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Paul will cave and allow this to pass, this is what he does almost every time.
That being said, I hope he doesn't. If Congress wants to increase regulation for hemp derived THC (also called Delta 8 THC) then put together a separate bill and run it through the process.
That won't happen because Congress doesn't actually pass bills anymore. They just lump everything together and slap "must pass" on it.
Also this quote is fun,
This type of THC has been available for several years with minimal regulation and the US has been just fine.
Edit: Reading articles is difficult. At the time of the article posting (~2pm Monday) Paul hadn't "caved". At the time of my comment (Tuesday) he already had.
The Sunday vote was cloture, aka we're done debating.
The Monday vote happened around 8pm, since that was less than 30 hours later there must have been another vote to skip the 30 hour timer.
Given the timing Paul, at best, delayed the vote by 6 hours.
There seems to be a lot of confusion in this thread about hemp derived THC and delta-8 THC. Delta-8 THC is an unregulated cannabinoid that can be made by converting CBD through a chemical process. But hemp also contains Delta-9 THC, which is the same thing that would come in the recreational or medical cannabis you'd get in a legal state. The limitation is that the products are only allowed to contain up to 0.3% Delta-9 THC by volume. The funny workaround here is that products like edibles and drinks can easily still contain a recreational dose of Delta-9 THC while staying well below 0.3% THC by volume. This has created a legal market for THC products and I've actually really enjoyed it, living in a state that still does not have any form of medical or recreational cannabis available.
So I'm less familiar with Delta 9 THC, but my understanding is that both Delta 8 THC and Delta 9 THC are able to be derived/extracted from hemp. If I'm understanding you correctly, it's a different process for each, but the end result is still that we get one and/or the other.
Additionally both of them have the same restrictions as you mentioned, being less then 0.3% THC by volume, which makes them excellent candidates for edibles and beverages.
I think Delta 9 THC is closer to "traditional" THC, which matches with what you've said.
Living in a state that does have recreational cannabis, I was surprised when I first saw Delta 8 THC products sold alongside alcoholic beverages.
So while technically this law change won't affect me much, I've certainly appreciated the destigmatization of "THC" at a federal level.
Delta-9 THC IS what people just called "THC" forever. It's the very same compound that's found in your recreational or medical cannabis products. It can be extracted from hemp naturally. The distinction in naming conventions is a more recent thing due to the prevalence of Delta-8 THC products.
I mean, it hasn't, but it has nothing to do with the availability of marijuana.
Fair enough. The US has been just fine with regards to the wide availability of his particular form of THC.
We're not living in a world of "Reefer Madness".
Until recently, my red state has thca which is what the plant naturally produces. It was really convenient to walk into a decent store and get a $5 gram. Then they closed that loophole specifically earlier this year. And to be clear, they had lab results and all the sorta info you would get at a medical place.
To be fair, if a product isn’t properly regulated, there’s nothing to stop producers from printing good looking lab results on the labels and say good enough. Doesn’t mean its been tested, or the data on the labels and say matches the contents at all..
Seems like there has been report after report on this problem being prevalent in the supplement industry.
When I went there it was a well put together, clean place, clerks did seem sketchy, and the labels matched the results. I know what you're saying, but I can be at least certain they weren't selling vitamin E-acetate vapes.
You probably didnt know but marijuana is a racist word invented to blame Mexicans for cannabis consumption.
Edit: As people seem to think this was meant in a condescending way: I really just wanted to get the info out. As we are in kind of a progressive bubble here on Lemmy I assumed that most people try to avoid using racist language and thus would appreciate this info if they dont already know. I at least was glad when told and would appreciate people telling me when I accidentally use racist language instead of keeping quiet and potentially judging me. Sorry I offended so many of you.
That cat isn’t going back in the bag. Marijuana is what we call weed.
We have several hundred words for it, as far as I know nobody of any race or ethnic background is offended by any of them.
I mean you do you, but there are dozens of words for it and I dont see the need to use the one invented by racists.
Edit: invented by racists specifically to promote racism.
What would you call a single serving bottle of liquor?
A fifth.
No idea, what do you mean?
A 50ml bottle would be called what? The most common answer is a racist term for Japanese people and I have to correct almost every employee I have trained because of how common it is.
The correct proper answer is a "mini" but there's a more common term.
I honestly dont know what term you mean and I probably dont even know it, Im not a native English speaker.
But whats your point though? That racist terms are common? Im sure they are, but should that prevent people from trying to avoid them?
No, I was seeing if you were the kind of person to call out one "racist" term while ignoring another one because you don't see it as one which is what others are doing here with marijuana.
I put "racist" in quotes because i believe you are mistaken as to why Hearst publications popularized the term marijuana. As I recall they popularized marijuana so they could push for a cannabis ban because hemp based papers, which had recent developments to increase their efficiency, would threaten Hearst's paper processing plants. Had they pushed for a hemp/cannabis ban in their papers the medical community would have freaked out as it was in a bunch of medicines in that time. Thus marijuana was decried in the press.
Interesting. Thats not the story I heard/read but Ill take a look again.
But yes, Im sure I also have "racist" or problematic terms in my vocabulary without knowing about them.
Icod be mistaken about Hearst as he did lose a bunch of land to the Mexican liberation. He was very racist tegarding Mexicans as a result.
Technically I think most words were invented by racists.
Ur right^^ but most were not invented specifically to promote racisms
This is that kind of hill that some progressives try to die on that serves absolutely no good and just perpetuates the stereotype that the left is full of "thought police" and want to make laws about words.
Let's focus this energy against enemies, and there are plenty.
Would you say the same about the n-word? This is the exact same argument people used to make when the efforts of getting rid of its frequent use started growing.
I dont see the point of not making informative statements in an already progressive bubble. How would you suggest I "focus the energy against enemies" in a lemmy thread aboud weed?
It's absolutely not the same, one word offends a lot of people broadly because it signals how you feel about them, and the other doesn't do that, the other is a word that people of all races and backgrounds use and is never used as a signal from people to show how they feel about a race or minority group, at least not in the modern world. Nobody is going to call you a racist for using the word marijuana... except if we start cycling what you're saying here, in this bubble of dry kindling and impressionable minds looking to police each other, then there WILL be debates about the word, and it will continue to bleed into other spaces and make leftists infight because it's a stupid thing to try to chastise people about, and it will become another performative issue that makes people roll their eyes at activism in general.
Honestly I wouldn't bring it up at all. If you're not in an etymology discussion, what good do you POSSIBLY expect to come from educating people about this? What is your end-goal? Do you actually think it's worth the energy of even trying to get people to change their language for no good reason when it serves no real good or have any real benefits?
Youre right, its not the same kind of term. Its the same argument though, thats what I said.
Not sure if youre serious about passing on knowledge being useless, but Ill bite. I am simply basing it off my own efforts to avoid using problematic language. I very much appreciate people telling me when I use words like that and why they are problematic, so that I can potentially avoid them in the future.
Let me ask you the same: What do you expect to gain from me not educating people about the origins of the term? From people still connecting crime to minorities through language invented by racists for propaganda?
Educate people all you want, in the proper context. You know VERY WELL that someone was going to try to push back on it here because you want to have a debate with someone and are too scared to face down actual conservatives in conservative spaces about their ACTUAL racism.
I am extremely frustrated with leftists online bickering about MOTHERFUCKING TONE AND WORDS that don't hurt anyone because someone, somewhere, who isn't even effected by said words, started saying it was problematic, BECAUSE MY COUNTRY IS COLLAPSING AND YOU SHITS ARE BEING PERFORMATIVE.
That's it, I'm done, I will never see another message from you because you're stubborn and I don't have time nor patience, I have dozens of accounts across different platforms for scolding dumb shits and promoting unity and direction forward towards common goals. You decide in silence if you have any responsibility and accountability to help keep our collected ideological group focused on the right concerns while our constitution burns.
Not sure where youre going with your immature accusations and name calling. I can understand that you are angry, but maybe you should direct your anger at the people who deserve it instead of a neutral piece of information.
I never called anyone racist or accused them of anything and it hurts me that you keep putting words into my mouth and accusing me of ill intent when I didnt have any. I shared an info that someone once shared with me which I was thankful for, I wanted to do the same. Sorry it offended you so badly.
Good luck getting people to stop using the word lol
Im not specifically invested in making people stop using it, but I think most people dont know and theres really no need to use the one word invented by racists when theres literally hundreds of synonyms.
you're getting mad at the wrong thing, everyone knows what MJ is weed, and they dont see it as a racist thing used to describe someone.
Literally not mad, just trying to inform. In my experience many people here make an effort not to use racist language, I at least would appreciate people telling me when I use such words without knowing.
I could dive into any one of a hundred thousand different aspects of our daily life and society that has roots in some form of oppression or hate or violence. Our society is built upon a mountain of skulls.
We all know this, and we move on. We cannot change how we got here, we cannot undo the harm of the past by changing our language. The vast, vast majority of english-speaking people will tell you this: it does not matter the origin of a thing nearly as much as how that thing is used here and now. Marijuana is not used to signal anything or to harm anyone, UNLESS YOU MAKE IT.
You are not raising awareness, you are raising a spectre of hate behind a word that has become disarmed and it serves no purpose other than a desire to see that spectre for some reason.
I wouldnt say that it has no meaning anymore. Maybe not for you and many others, but weed still has a bad reputation with a lot of people and Im sure if you ask older folks some will tell you the Mexicans brought the devils lettuce to the US.
Be that as it may, some people (like me) just dont like using words that were invented purely as a tool for racist propaganda. Why are so many of you so invested in making me stop informing people about this? I would not have wanted the person who told me first to just shut up about it because others convinced them its not worth pointing out.
You are contradicting yourself here. Either you don't care if people use it, or you do care and want people to use different words. You brought it up so have a stance.
OR, we could direct this energy at actual targets like the people trying to take away all of our rights and actually bring back racism and bigotry as law.
If you just wanted to point it out like some kind of trivia and educate people, but don't want to sound like you're lecturing or advocating for something dumb, you need to reformat your original comment in a different way so it's not prescriptive or suggesting anything is wrong with saying it now since it doesn't actually bother most people.
I dont see a contradiction. Not everything a person says is meant to make other people do things. We are in a progressive bubble where I assume most people make an effort to not use racist language and when I see someone using it I inform them about it and however they use that information is up to them.
How would you suggest I reword it? English is not my first language and it didnt seem pushy to me.
You said this, but you're STILL trying to defend your stance that we should not use the word. It's not a matter of if you're being pushy, it's WHAT you're pushing.
In this case, do you REALLY want to see progressives in these spaces divide up into camps arguing if the word is safe to say or not? Do you think everyone will just "work it out" between each other? Have you any clue how these issues harm progressive movements?
I am literally half thinking you might be a bad-faith plant or provocateur, even Lemmy has them.
I never said you specifically should not use it. I said I dont see the need. And if others who read this also feel the same way, they might make the decision to stop using it. It amazes me how defensive people got, it was not my intention at all to make people feel bad. I just wanted to get the info out. Kind of feels like when people get mad at the sentence "I dont eat meat". Like "How can you be so condescending", "Why do you force your ideals on us".
Its a bit funny that all of you keep accusing me of "dividing people into camps" and "starting useless discussions", while all I wrote was a neutral piece of information which could have stood on its own. The answers though, I feel like theyre very much trying to divide people into camps.
No, many people are aware of that. It isn't some obscure secret.
I didnt say most people dont know. I was specifically talking to the person who used it.