Elon Musk, How does taking one toke of weed make you an addict, but drinking alcohol doesn't make you an alcoholic?

Elon Musk Smokes WEED (1) hit ? With Joe Rogan

    It is interesting how people blow out of proportion what Elon actually did in this interview. How the SEC and others seem to be gunning for someone who gives hope for a better world. Taking one hit from a joint does not mean he is an addict and smokes it all the time and if you took the time to watch the interview you would know that he tried it and does not care for it. 
LOOK here are the questions that nobody is asking and should be asking.

1. He said it didn't do anything for him, so why would he smoke on a regular basis and how does taking (1) toke make him an addict? 
2. If you take ONE puff or drag from a cigarette, does that make you a smoker?
3. The alcohol he was drinking did more than the one hit from a joint did but I don't see anybody calling him an alcoholic?
4. Alcohol is responsible for millions of peoples deaths but somehow it is still legal, why?
5. Why did the SEC do only an 8 week investigation, if you had more of a case, wouldn't you take longer to make sure you had a case? 
6. Is the SEC just another corrupt government agency being told to go after Elon because he is hurting big oil and making NASA look bad?
7. The minute Elon Musk told the SEC he would fight rather than admit to something he didn't do  the SEC back tracks and offer a lesser punishment? Where they hoping he would just fold and take their punishment like a good dog?
8. If the SEC had a real case why would they back track instead of sticking to their guns. If you actually had a case against him wouldn't you throwing the book at Elon and hit him with a tougher punishment to make an example of him?
9. Now they are saying his security clearance is in question because he took one ONE hit from a joint. Does this sound more like a bunch of jealous people(a.k.a. NASA, Big oil ect) who were made to look bad are trying to get even with him? 
10. The fact that Elon makes NASA look like a joke had to piss off a few people, not to mention the contractors that are over charging the US tax payers, not to mention NASA did't even think about going back to the moon or even talk about human flight until Elon Musk talked about sending people to Mars. Is it possible these people seeing what they think is an opportunity to get even with Elon are just throwing a tantrum ?
11. Why is the media really all over this? Is it to just make money or is there a darker more sinister political reason?

 In the end none of this would be happening if people would think for themselves and ask more questions.

Donald Trump?

Caution: before you run off at the mouth about how bad Donald Trump is read the questions first.

Regardless of whether you are Republican, or Democrat, independent, or tea party, you have to admit there are a great many odd things happening in this election that don't quite add up.

Donald Trump appears to be two thirds ahead of all the other Republican candidates, which makes him the clear majority leader. So why would the Republican Party want to eliminate two thirds of their potential voters? The Republican Party over the last couple of decades has been moving toward the middle because it wasn't getting the votes. Claiming that it wanted to be more tolerant of gays, other religions, and more ethnically diverse. Along comes Donald Trump and all of a sudden the Republican Party is all about how Christian you are, why is that? The Pope comes out and says that he doesn't think Trump is a Christian , but the question everybody should be asking is when was the last time a pope spoke out about someone in an American election? One voter survey came out and said the majority of people were voting for Trump because he was not a career politician, and was promising change, not that he was a Christian, so why would you ignore a survey like that if you want more votes? A day before super Tuesday the KKK endorses Donald Trump and Whoopi Goldberg is all over that (and I don't blame her ) as if it were the end of the world because he did not strongly denounce the endorsement. Is it possible that Donald Trump did not want to give the KKK any free advertising ?  The KKK is a small group yet oddly their support came the day before super Tuesday, so the real question is who controls their leash? Is it possible that the people who hate Trump the most, are the people that are worried the most about their cushy overpaid corrupt jobs? As a businessman I would think he would be most focused on corruption and waste, so wouldn't those people responsible for that corruption and waste be the ones yelling the loudest that he shouldn't be president? Mitt Romney comes out against Trump yet when he was running for president he was trying to get Trump to support him, doesn't that sound a little odd?
     In the many years that I worked for Amazon.com I had several opportunities to talk with Jeff Bezos, and when I asked him about negative publicity he said " There is no such thing as negative publicity." I asked Mr.Bezos  about a negative news story about Amazon.com and why he didn't think that that was going to hurt the company. Mr. Bezos said" the negativity will be remembered for only a couple of weeks, but the name Amazon.com would be heard around the world and you can't buy advertising like that." So if the media really wanted Donald Trump to stop getting so much attention, shouldn't the networks stop giving it to him? Doesn't this all sounds a little bit like "Wag The Dog"?
    It was mentioned that both Ben Carson and Donald Trump do not have international experience, but if you're running a company and you don't know how to do something wouldn't you hire someone who did? When was the last time you heard of a corporate executive being required or able to do every job in his company? Is international experience a legitimate prereiquite of the job?
    Isn't it interesting that the most outstanding candidates seem to be the ones that are not career politicians?
    I have always believed that perfection is a human concept and I have yet to see a politician, or person for that matter, of any kind live up to to the standard of perfection. Wouldn't it be nice to have an election where there are no parties and no divisions were a person is elected to office not because of his party affiliation but because he's qualified for the job?
 

   And the ultimate question is; If you go for a job interview your employer does not have the right to ask you your political, religious, sexual orientation, or ethnic background why is it okay to ask a political candidate?