Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Obama's Curious, Curt Response to a Torrent of Pot Legalization Questions

Posted by Paul Armentano, NORML at 12:17 PM on December 16, 2008.


Change.gov's response to pot supporters -- "President-elect Obama is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana."

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get PEEK in your
mailbox!

 

 

“The war on drugs has been an utter failure. (W)e need to rethink and decriminalize our (nation's) marijuana laws."

-Barack Obama, January 2004 (Watch the video here.)

"I inhaled frequently, that was the point."

-Barack Obama, November 2006 (Watch the video here.)

Q: "Will you consider legalizing marijuana so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it, and create millions of new jobs and create a billion dollar industry right here in the U.S.?"

A: "President-elect Obama is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana."

-Statement from Change.gov, the official website of President-Elect Obama, December 15, 2008

Okay, count me among those disappointed, but hardly surprised to see that Change.gov -- the official website of the incoming Obama administration -- answered the above question, which finished first out of over 7,000 public policy questions submitted to the website, in the most curt and dismissive way possible.

That said, as StoptheDrugWar.org's Scott Morgan writes, Obama's brevity is, in fact, quite telling.

As frustrating and insulting as it is to witness an important matter brushed casually to the side without explanation, Obama's answer actually says a lot. It says that he couldn't think of even one sentence to explain his position. Within the vast framework of totally paranoid anti-pot propaganda, Obama couldn't find a single argument he wanted to associate himself with. That's why he simply said "No. Next question."

All of this highlights the well-known fact that Obama agrees that our marijuana laws are deeply flawed. He's said so, and has back-pedaled recently for purely political reasons. If Obama's transition team tried to give an accurate description of his position on marijuana reform it would look like this:

Q: "Will you consider legalizing marijuana so that the government can regulate it, tax it, put age limits on it, and create millions of new jobs and create a billion dollar industry right here in the U.S.?" S. Man, Denton

A: President-elect Obama will not use his political capital to advance the legalization of marijuana. While he agrees that arresting adults for marijuana possession is a poor use of law enforcement resources, he believes that the issue remains too controversial to do anything about it.

In fact, Obama essentially said as much earlier this year when asked about the legalization of marijuana for medicinal purposes.

 

Obama: "When it comes to medical marijuana, my attitude is if it is an issue of doctors prescribing marijuana, I think that should be appropriate. Whether I want to use a whole lot of political capital on (this) issue; the likelihood of that being real high on my priority list is not likely." (Watch the video here.)

So then, disappointed as we are, how should we proceed?

Answer: Just as we have been.

To be fair to President-Elect Obama, he never pledged to legalize marijuana. Quite the contrary, during his Presidential campaign he backtracked from his previous comments supporting pot decriminalization, and he even went so far as to pick one of the chief architects of the modern drug war to be his Vice President. In short, to believe that the Obama team would have responded to the legalization question any other way was idealistic at best, and foolish at worst.

But that hardly means that we activists should write off the next four years.

In November, editors at the website Alternet.org asked me to draft "a progressive agenda for Obama" regarding marijuana policy. At that time, I listed several realistic, practical actions Obama could take to substantially reform America's antiquated and punitive pot laws. (Note, legalizing marijuana by Executive Order was not on my wish list.)

These actions include:

1. As President, Obama must uphold his campaign promise to "not use Justice Department resources to try and circumvent state laws" that legalize the medical use of cannabis. (Watch the video here.)

2. Obama can appoint leaders to the US Department of Justice, DEA, and the Office of National Drug Control Policy who possess professional backgrounds in public health, addiction and treatment rather than in law enforcement.

3. Obama can support the autonomy and health of Washington D.C. voters by encouraging Congress to lift the so-called "Barr amendment" (passed by Congress in 1998 and reinstated every year since then), which prohibits the District of Columbia from implementing a 1998 voter-approved ballot initiative legalizing the use of marijuana by authorized patients.

4. Obama can call for the creation of a bipartisan Presidential commission to review the budgetary, social and health costs associated with federal marijuana prohibition, and to make progressive recommendations for future policy changes.

Ultimately, of course, it's Congress, not the president, who is responsible for crafting America's oppressive federal anti-drug strategies. Moreover, it is clear that in the coming years this battle will continue to primarily be fought -- and won -- on the state level, not in Washington D.C.

That's not to say that we should not continue to keep the pressure on Obama by continuing to post questions to websites like Change.gov. (My suggestion for the next round of voting How about: "On Election Day, over 3 million voters decided to legalize the medical use of cannabis in Michigan, making it the 13th state to enact laws allowing the legal medical use of marijuana. While campaigning, you pledged: 'What I'm not going to be doing is spend Justice Department resources to try and circumvent state laws on this issue.' As President, will you and your Attorney General uphold this promise not to target and prosecute patients and providers who are in compliance with state medical marijuana laws?")

However, we must always remember that it will be the actions of tens of thousands -- not the actions of just one man -- that will ultimately bring an end to America's vindictive and senseless war on cannabis consumers.

Now let's get back to work!

Digg!

Tagged as: drugs, marijuana, obama, pot reform


Under Pressure From Tea Party Activists, Charleston GOP Censures Lindsey Graham For Bipartisanship
Part of the fury from the right against Graham is being spurred by the oil and coal industry.
Post by Lee Fang. November 11, 2009.
Murdoch and Murdoch Flak Confused About Racism, Truth
What must it be like to do spin for News Corps?
Post by Tana Ganeva. November 11, 2009.
Right-Wing Pundits Now Lecturing the Military: Bases Need More Guns
Logically more guns would mean less shootings, right? Wait ...
Post by Eric Boehlert. November 11, 2009.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Hey Paul,
Posted by: Lauren on Dec 16, 2008 12:53 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why in all these years of writing stories about pot, is it you don't report on it's religious use?

I mean, isn't it kind of a major oversight in your reporting? I would include a mention in every story. Why don't you?

Don't you ever ask yourself why we are treated so badly by christian zealots? Or are you one of those people who is resigned to it and accepts it as an unmentionable? Like priest sexual abuse or incest.

Or is it worse than that, you think we deserve it? I'd like to know.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Hey Paul, Posted by: chuckjs
Maybe...
Posted by: JoshuaLudd on Dec 16, 2008 12:59 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe someone should tell him... he's already won the election. He can actually do stuff now without threat of losing a campaign.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Maybe... Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: Lauren
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: chuckjs
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: hermjo
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: atheistcable
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: Pissed Off Woman
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: Old Uncle Dave
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: Tombo
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: robert.noll
» RE: Maybe... Posted by: kungfuma
Obama's finger's were crossed behind his back when he spoke in January 2004 :P
Posted by: GuitarBill on Dec 16, 2008 1:03 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In January 2004, Barack Obama said, “The war on drugs has been an utter failure...we need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws."

As president-elect (when it actually counts) Barack Obama reversed his position on Drug Prohibition with the following statement: "President-elect Obama is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana...President-elect Obama will not use his political capital to advance the legalization of marijuana."

I think this is an ample demonstration of Obama's "character" and commitment to the "progressive" ideas he advocated during his presidential campaign.

The fact is that the soccer moms, local district attorneys, police officers, prison guards, Judges, law and order types, the religious right and various assorted homegrown--if you'll pardon the expression-- control freaks would have joined forces to crucify Obama if he so much as expressed one word in favor of Drug Prohibition reform.

Face it folks, there are no liberals in the Congress (save Bernie Sanders. Hell, even Kucinich is anti-abortion); thus, Obama--even if he actually meant what he said back in January 2004--has virtually no Congressional support where Drug Prohibition is concerned.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Kucinich Posted by: oregoncharles
» RE: Kucinich who cares! Posted by: chuckjs
» RE: Kucinich position on drug war Posted by: Bliss Doubt
» Kucinich anti-abortion, not so! Posted by: Bliss Doubt
» Also Posted by: Bliss Doubt
» Unbearable disappointment Posted by: Bliss Doubt
C.H.A.N.G.E.
Posted by: channing on Dec 16, 2008 1:40 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Crafting
Hypocritical
Avenues
for the
New
Government
Empire

.gov

He said during the campaign that to pay for needed programs he'd review all Federal agencies/policies and eliminate counterproductive and expensive ones, did he not? Approximately 800,000 taxpayer supported prisoners of the drug war today, clogged judicial systems, overstretched federal, state and local budgets everywhere, victimless crimes, broken families, and all this certainly isn't fighting them over there or preserving the people's Liberty now is it.


Leaving Iraq in maybe 2010, 2011, 2012, or Never? What's next, Appointing George Bush and Dick Cheney on as Lead Counsel of the White House PNAC Working Group?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

so what?
Posted by: caducus on Dec 16, 2008 2:52 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Yeah, Obama doesn't want to waste his political capital on cannabis reform. So what? There is a thing called TACT. Obama knows how to use it. Legalizing cannabis didn't get Nader anywhere now did it? We've got bigger fish to fry immediately, back off.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: so what CHANGE? Posted by: channing
YES
Posted by: caducus on Dec 16, 2008 2:55 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow, an intelligent comment. Congress passes legislation, not the president. There is no point in the president proposing legislation that won't pass, and it looks bad when that happens. Think about it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» You shut up! Posted by: Bliss Doubt
» RE: Give me a break Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» RE: Give me a break Posted by: EncinoM
» RE: Give me a break Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» EncinoM, WRONG!!! Posted by: Bliss Doubt
If Obama calls off the dogs,
Posted by: pelican beak on Dec 16, 2008 3:07 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
so they stop going after small-scale, low-level, close-to-the-ground smokers and growers, and lets the states' decriminalization laws function unopposed, that would be something. If he won't overturn the wretched anti-pot laws, then let them wither on the vine and stop wasting money on this truly stupid oppression effort.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: If Obama calls off the dogs, Posted by: pelican beak
He NEVER said he favored legalization.
Posted by: gar1948 on Dec 16, 2008 3:39 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To the best of my knowledge (and I could be wrong and if you think so, give me sources please) Obama never said he favored legalization of pot. He said he favored decriminalization.

Perhaps the question could have been better worded?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is why we should have voted for Ron Paul
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Dec 16, 2008 11:25 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But he was a Republican and therefore automatically evil...

Obama does not give a $hit about what is morally or ethically right.

He is too concerned with what other people think to make his own decisions and be his own man.

Why else do you think a one term senator would get so much support from the Democratic party and the television media?

They knew he'd be another lame easily controlled President.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: This is why we should have voted for Ron Paul Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
» RE: This is why we should have voted for Ron Paul Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
Every comment here has missed the point.
Posted by: chuckjs on Dec 17, 2008 3:36 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama cannot unilateraly change laws. That would make your country a dictaorship and exactly the same as your current adminstartion is.

Wasn't change the focus of the election and Obama's policy.

Why do you all want him to force congress and the Senate to decrimilize pot for your benefit like he was George Bush or Vladimir Putin.

Your country is a democracy and you need Congress, the Senate and the POTUS to be on board or the laws will never change. Stop brow beating Obama because he is not a Dictator nor the head of the Democratic party. Being elected POTUS does not make you head of the DNC or the decider for all democratically elected Democrats!

Educate yourself and put the heat to those who matter like your congresspeople and Senators. Maybe if they introduced a decriminalization law and passed it, Obama just might sign it rather than VETO it. Give it a try. It is, after all, the way your political system is supposed to work. Democratically!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Give me a break
Posted by: PJT on Dec 17, 2008 4:47 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We live in a country that is having a serious economic breakdown, in a world that is becoming an increasingly dangerous place. Obama has eight years of the worst deficit of leadership this country has ever experienced in its history to make up for. So what do you want him to do: waste whatever political capital he has on decriminalizing DOPE SMOKING. Brilliant.

I smoked plenty of dope myself-- and inhaled too-- forty years ago. My memory of the time is, how shall I say, clouded. Now, at age 60, I don't drink, don't smoke anything, don't take pills and avoid most medicines, and eat a healthy diet. Guess what my prescription for you all is? Ask me if I fee sorry for some moron who is in the slammer for five years for growing dope in his attic.

There is nothing more pathetic than the crying and gnashing of teeth coming from the dope heads out there whose first priority in life is to scheme for the right to screw up their brains. As a libertarian I couldn't care less what stupid thing you want to do to your head. Go ahead and drink half a gallon of vodka this weekend. Please-- don't let me stand in the way of that heroin overdose. Except that 1) I don't want you on the road when you are screwed up; 2) I don't want you living next door to me-- because I don't want to have to worry if you are going to set your house on fire while you are stoned and 3) I don't want you as an employee because you will be useless. I don't want to pay your unemployment, I don't want to support your medical care to remedy the harm you do to yourself, and I don't want your psychotic kids in my kid's school.

If you want to smoke dope without paying the price, start out by changing the laws in your state. What? Your state legislators are worse assholes than even I am? There are some countries that have sensible dope policies and laws, like Canada and the Netherlands. Do you contribute MONEY to any organizations that are working to change the laws locally and at the federal level in a systematic, defensible manner? Are you giving MONEY to any organizations that gather data to prove how INefficient and costly our drug laws are? If you are not putting your MONEY where your mouth is, then I suggest you shut up.

I am unsympathetic mainly because I find sobriety to be far superior to any other mental state I have experienced, and I have tried them all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Give me a break Posted by: Tombo
» RE: Give me a break Posted by: rotorooter
» RE: Give me a break Posted by: Grandma Crabby
» RE: Give me a break Posted by: atheistcable
» RE: Give me a break Posted by: pizzmoe
The PLOT of POT
Posted by: BeyondBeliefs on Dec 17, 2008 5:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
:POT:WEED:SLAVERY:

I live in a forest surrounded by weeds and mushrooms.
If I ate them, some of them would make my head spin.
Who willfully want to make their head spin ?
Is Life in the world so bad that a spinning head is relief ?

The Evil Empire needs your Labor to build what they own.
In 1914 the CoCa Cola company stopped putting cocaine into their soda.
Coffee made the slaves labor just as hard, but with a lower risk of death.
Working harder is not against the law. But working LESS is.

If we made TOOTSIE ROLLS against the law, and made each one cost $100.oo, then a Million Americans would now be trafficking in TOOTSIE ROLLS....
a million Americans would be making, collecting, selling, stealing and murdering each other to be the one who has TOOTSIE ROLLS.
There is only one thing MORE STUPID than smoking WEEDS, and that is to OUTLAW WEEDS.

This slave empire wishes to identify and JAIL every slave who seeks to escape, and rebel against the oppression and slavery of this evil slave plantation. If you are caught with TOOTSIE ROLLS, then your property will be comfiscated and you will be jailed.

( Stoning, is no longer used so that the rebellious may return to their SLAVERY after serving their time in prison. )

We are arming rebels and government, sending weapons and armies into foreign lands, using the excuse that people are killing each other over some expensive, worthless, garbage, that the American children are using to escape their misery.

Consider what would happen if Walmart gave away this garbage for free.... no one in America, or overseas, would be making, growing, burglarizing, or murdering to obtain, or to buy or to sell garbage.

And I ask you, would any American want to ''eat'' garbage if they were happy with their life ?

- Thomas T. Panto

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Once again
Posted by: PressurePoint on Dec 17, 2008 6:49 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Obama proves himself smarter than his questioners. Reporters are just looking for "red meat" for their papers, and trying to make a name for themselves. Obama knows that even if his interlocutors don't. Why squander political capital indeed on such a low level issue? He can just decriminalize and boom! We're where 90% of the country wants us to be without having given the media dogs the "story" they're looking for, and w/o having given Rush the faux ammo he has republican wet dreams over.
Barak is the coolest, ever.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Once again Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com
The Enforcement of Lies and Beliefs
Posted by: BeyondBeliefs on Dec 17, 2008 7:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We can call it ''peer pressure'' or ''Lynch mob mentality'', but the problems of the ''Old World'' persist here in the ''New World''.

The Anti-Life factions in America will try to use the ''forbidden'' topics to Label Obama as ''UnHoly'' or ''UnPatriotic''.

The opposition to Human Life will try to trick Obama into committing, one way or the other, on Smoking vegetation, on Unauthorized holy matrimony, medical intervention using abortion, on teaching evolution or stupid design, on teaching that Human Hormones were a mistake made by an idiot god, or on forbidding the teaching of Truth, and on imposing medieval lies on the innocent children trapped in our official ''Education'' systems.

Today, as in the old days, it remains al the Kings Men... the patriotic flag saluting, faithful stone worshiping attackers of Living Things, that are forcing all of the Life on this planet to defend themselves and their families from our inherantly evil fabrications called ''nations'' and ''religions''.

What came first ? the Ignorance or the carelessness ?

- Thomas T. Panto

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shameful but not surprising.
Posted by: James W. Harris on Dec 17, 2008 8:07 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Shameful. Obama himself used drugs earlier in his life, and he, like any sane person who has looked at the issue, knows the Drug War is immoral and a failure. And that pot prohibition is especially unjustifiable.

Such intellectual dishonesty and political cowardice from Obama is disgusting, but not surprising, given his willingness to compromise on other key issues. Remember FISA, anyone?

Obama is a canny politician, and he has surrounded himself with authoritarian, statist types.

Get ready for four years that will shock and appall those who still have faith in government and politics.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

One Step at a Time
Posted by: gar1948 on Dec 17, 2008 8:27 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"...he never pledged to legalize marijuana."

That quote is from the article. What Obama did say was that he was in favor of decriminalization. The attitude against weed wasn't developed in four years and it won't be overturned in four years. It has to be done one step at a time. People who are passionate about this issue need to take what he has offered, not try to set up traps for him by asking politically loaded questions.

First we decriminalize, then we legalize. One step at an time.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Healthcare reform!!!!
Posted by: garry minor on Dec 17, 2008 9:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What I would like to know is why no one is bringing up the fact to Mr. Obama that THC is proven to destroy tumors, promote the growth of brain cells, is a superior inhibitor of the plaque that causes Alzheimers, and can safely treat epilepsy, autism, arthritis, migraine, asthma, emphysema, chronic pain, nausea, MS, ALS, OCD, ADHD, diabetes, depression, anxiety, MRSA(staph), cystic fibrosis, tuberculosis, skin disorders, herpes, Parkinsons, Huntingtons, Tourettes, Crohn's disease, and more? Why isn't anyone bringing up the fact that it's seed is the single most nutritionally complete food source on Earth and reintroduced into our diets can alleviate many of the above mentioned diseases, and help end world hunger? Wouldn't that affect healthcare reform?
Mr. Obama said that the science would guide his decision making process. Why is it that no one is bringing the science regarding all the medicinal values of this plant to his attention! Medical cannabis can revolutionize medicine only if the scientific facts are known!
If enough people simply knew the Truth about cannabis and its many uses, it wouldn't be illegal! We all know that! Were not only talking about medicines, but, fuels, lubricants, paper, plastics, textiles, plywood, etc.... Over 25,000 products. Surely NORML can provide this information to Obama's people and get a response. I've tried, but no real response!!! They just let me know they read it.
Cannabis hemp industrializtion can change the way we live, provide millions of Earth friendly jobs, make health care affordable for all, feed the hungry, and promote social harmony.
So, if Mr. Obama is really looking for an answer to the big problems facing our nation, healthcare, jobs, fuels, pollution, war for oil, etc.., the only answer is currently illegal to grow or possess in the "Land of the Free!!" Has anyone brought this to his attention?
How sad that the United States of America, the greatest nation on Earth, is the only major nation not growing Industrial Hemp and censors it's people of the Truth of the many uses regarding the #1 source of biomass on the planet!! Kaneh bosm, Cannabis, Hemp!
The flaming sword and the Tree of Life!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Legalize Pot in Christian America? I Think Not.
Posted by: AlteredStates on Dec 17, 2008 11:58 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I can't think of a more up-tight group of people in this country than Christians. Christians seem to think that, the bigger and fatter the stick that's up their ass, the better a Christian they will be. Somehow, Americans think that being up-tight is a sign of the "Holy Spirit". Being judgmental, self-righteous, and downright nasty to other people who don't believe those same old bullshit stories about Christianity is just another "day in paradise" to them.

So, if you think that Congress, that is filled with the above like-minded people, is going to legalize pot anytime soon, don't bet on it. You would be chasing after a fool's errand. Don't forget, they have to be re-elected every 2 to 6 years, and they have to play to their audience in order to be elected again and again. Every politician of the likes of Obama has always attracted the attention of the voters by being different...while campaigning! But, as soon as they are introduced to the Oval Office, everything changes. Whatever is new, is quickly pushed to the "back burner", and then it's business as usual. I don't think Obama will turn into a died-in-the-wool "cracker", and he isn't going to be "Bush IV", but he is going to change his views on the more advanced issues like legalization.

Right now, the economy is the most pressing issue. But now, would be the time to chill a bit and think of how to get out of this nightmare sanely and justly. But, sanity and justice is not part of the American mind set. People have been told for generations of the "evils of pot", so don't think that any new thinking will come from Washington. The DEA will continue raiding doctors offices and pot pharmacies. The only possible change in status for pot would be de-criminalization, not legalization, especially at the national level.
The people who run this country aren't interested in your mental or physical health. That's why we don't have universal health care coverage. They are more interested in busting unions and keeping everyone on the jagged-edge of poverty and running to their treadmill jobs, just to survive.

But pot, takes you off the treadmill of life for a while and lets you see just how crazy life really is. Native Americans knew this before the "White Man" came to what we call America and fucked-up everything with their Puritanical mindset. It is White America who made tobacco and alcohol our drugs of choice. Even though those two drugs kill over half a million people a year in this country alone, it is still legal! The FDA tells us that it is for health reasons that they keep pot illegal. But, when you recite health statistics on alcohol and tobacco, the conversation is usually over. They don't want to hear it. They just want you to keep on working for more corporate profits and stay one step ahead of the bill collectors.

Well, on that note I'll leave you. Good luck, and I think I'll light-up. See ya.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DOES ANYONE KNOW HOW TO SAY--
Posted by: crazy carlos on Dec 17, 2008 3:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Bullshit!! There are somewhere around 800,000 people in JAIl and our hero doesn't care to risk his political capital!! After really looking at this man I voted for an Independent.

I don't regret my decision; this amoung many other things convinced me this man is just shooting everyone thru the grease. He is proving to be nothing more than a 2 bit pool hustler. carlos

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

he can do alot simply by de-funding the "War on Drugs"
Posted by: Bearzerker on Dec 21, 2008 4:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
my tax dollars are being wasted and siphoned off to pay off a republican boondoggle called the DEA!

politicals have always shirked there responsibility in this decision which should be a simple straight forward one... prohibition is simply unconstitutional...

the only way we can win this war on the absurd is to ensure its on the ballot and heavily debated...

question is simple...
should current drug law enforcement and prohibition continue or should a HARM approach be sought to address drug abuse as a medical issue instead of a legal issue.

put it on the next ballot and let the people decide... but ensure a real debate is put forward so people are deciding with there eyes open

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is just ONE of the many...
Posted by: ShrubtheWarcriminal on Dec 24, 2008 9:25 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...disappointments you can expect from the change.gov crowd.

The man is as shallow as his rhetoric.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Obama smoked / NORML joked
Posted by: HiTech RedNeck on Jan 2, 2009 5:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
But it bears watching that MJ compounds are showing up in more mainstream medicinal preparations being tested worldwide. Extracts, inhalers, patches etc. All standardized to content, though not NORMLized. I expect to see bureaucracy on this kind of "medical MJ" quietly ease as the science catches up.

Obama really, truly wants to be a 2 term president. He's not going to let himself go down in flames over a politically difficult issue like MJ smoking. Pun maybe unconsciously intended.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

New ideas on Legalization of Hemp
Posted by: jeffrey7 on Jan 5, 2009 1:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hemp Legalization = Police Safety

Ok, I know some of my readers are thinking I've just lost what few braincells I had left and may probably be writhing on the floor,foaming at the mouth. That might happen someday but let's delve into my alledged lunacy for a second.

The most dangerous call the cops have to make,by their own admission, are calls for 'Domestic Violence'. They're walking into an already hot situation andanything really can happen. Sometimes people wind up injured or worse. Not just the domestic combatants but the cops too. That's why they hate making these calls. Besides not really wanting to get involved with someone's marriage/family troubles,they don't want to get zapped by someone who thinks the last thing they need is a cop for marriage advice.

Now a long time back,in the 1920's, there was a group that was successful in getting drunken abusive husbands court ordered onto 'Hashish Therapy'
because it cooled a hot temper. The group was, The Women's Temperance League. Good job Ladies!!!

I know what you're thinking, 'Why the hell aren't we in the 1920's? Damn that was a time to live in!'. No...it wasn't.
Besides our time is now. Booze is legal so we need a new approach to the 'Legalization Situation'. Barney Frank has a good idea with his Bill, H.R.5843,keeping marujuana use limited to consenting adults,but it needs a kicker that will make it through the criminal justice committee's it gets sent through. They are the ones responsible for keeping hemp bills from becoming Hemp Laws. Fuck the 'schoolhouse rock' bullshit,that's not how bills become law,so it's a lie. Eat me ABC!!!!

We need to draft a 'act' rather than a bill,because they're easier to pass. This 'act' could be called something like 'The Police Safety and Domestic Tranquility Through Hemp Legalization
Act'

For the increased safety and psychological wellbeing of attending officers,on domestic violence calls,the most dangerous calls to said officers,and for the fostering of domestic tranquility where alchohol leads to domestic confrontations, we undertake to increase the safety of both the Police Officers involved and the domestic participants by legalizing the use,possesion,non-profit transfer,shareing and growing,of cannibas hemp.
Because of it's long,5000 year history as a pacifying agent and it's low risk of zero overdoses,that for the safety of the Police and the society,we make,for consenting adults,HEMP LEGAL

I think this could be a very workable approach. It's all in the wording. In America "Cop Safety' goes a long way.
This could be the biggest populace movement in history.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]