Obama Administration ‘Firmly Opposes’ Marijuana Legalization — Here’s Why

http://blogs.alternet.org/speakeasy/2010/05/11/obama-administration-%e2%80%98firmly-opposes%e2%80%99-marijuana-legalization-heres-why/

The Obama administration said Tuesday that it “firmly opposes” the legalization of any illicit drugs as California voters head to the polls to consider legalizing marijuana this fall.

The president and his drug czar re-emphasized their opposition to legalizing drugs in the first release of its National Drug Control Strategy this morning.

“Keeping drugs illegal reduces their availability and lessens willingness to use them,” the document, prepared by Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske, says. “That is why this Administration firmly opposes the legalization of marijuana or any other illicit drug.”
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

No Mr. Obama.... keeping drugs illegal causes a black market and gang violence.

What part of the Volstead Act did you not learn?

Thanks for the "Change", Mr. Obama. Keep on busting those 72-year-old cancer patients for eating MJ Brownies... they are so violent.

is a source for secret funds, a means to channel public dollars to military contractors, & a tool to control the poor.

BULLSHIT. Nobody today is put in prison for just using. That is, unless you first have a conviction for a much more serious crime and your probation/parole prohibit drug use or associating with drug users. But that is not what you said. Simple possession/use does not put you in prison in America today. Show me a single example in the last month. Or year. Please. I'm willing to learn. BULLSHIT.

Police arrest someone in America every 36 seconds on marijuana charges, with a record 872,000 arrests made in 2007, “more than for all violent crimes combined,” Hightower and Frazer point out. They note that 89 per cent of all marijuana arrests “are for simple possession of the weed, not for producing or selling it.”

http://www.laprogressive.com/law-and-the-justice-system/800000-americans-busted-annually-for-pot/



Pro-legalization cops slam drug war recalibration, say Obama ‘just talking about it’

The White House announced Tuesday a new strategy for the decades-old War on Drugs, saying it plans to place emphasis on treatment and prevention and urging sharp reductions to drug abuse rates nation-wide.

The plan's rosy language, however, doesn't quite mesh with the reality of the drug war's budget allotment: a fact that did not go unnoticed by activist group Law Enforcement Against Prohibition, which chastised the administration as "just talking about" a truly changed strategy over actually moving ahead with one.
--
"It's great to see the administration starting to talk like they want to actually change failed drug policies," Franklin added in the LEAP advisory. "But we can't let them get away with claiming that they've ended the 'war on drugs' while we continue to arrest 800,000 people a year on marijuana charges alone."

http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0511/police-group-slams-obamas-drug-war-recalibration/

You really think all 800,000 had priors? Tell that to my friend who did 17 months for 2 grams of weed, with no priors at all. In fucking Massachussets even. Somehow, judging by your tone, I doubt you're ready to listen at all. Hope you prove me wrong.

http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/seslaw08/sl080387.htm

Other states are following this trend as well. The worm is turning, albeit slowly.

One Repub in the state (forget his name off the top of my head) wants to pass a bill making it a $10,000 fine for transporting it. I guess a lot of people aren't paying the fine. I'd pay it on the spot if I could. It should be legal entirely, but this is still a pretty good deal. No arrest, no jail...pay the damn fine. :)

There are dozens of reasons why it should be legal, but even if someone is misguided enough to think it still should be illegal they should at least agree that we shouldn't be turning pot smokers into criminals.

Please provide evidence of someone going to prison that had a personal amount of pot on them.

+1

the "keeping drugs illegal keeps people from using drugs" argument is laughable...and with cannabis specifically, you even have a significant portion of the medical community lobbying for its use as a medicine. This sort of disingenuous posturing on the part of the "Drug Czar" is absurd. Why the fuck do we even have a "Drug Czar"? Should we have a "Food Czar" too? How about a "Television Programming Czar"? Gotta keep everything under control and all...

just to maintain stability.

because the DEA is a dumping ground or jobs program for political hacks. If the Administration doesn't change its posture and act on the people's will, it will be one term and out.

Never heard him say he was FOR legalizing it and his admin has done more towards the acceptance of it than previous.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/19/new-medical-marijuana-pol_n_325426.html

all your life.

It's like, "Hmmmm- I wonder what other things they've told me that were all lies?"

She was the Surgeon-General (I think under raygun but I'm to tired to look it up tonight). She was fired because she suggested the legalization of marijuana. You can't speak truth to (corporate ) power, even if it is your job to protect the health of Americans. What a Fascist country we have become since the raygun era. "Unfettered capitalism" is the worst system ever tried by humanity, yep it led to all of the military dictatorships... corporate/American sponsored terrorists.

on edit; I checked, she was vilified by conservatives and fired by Clinton. All the same party after raygun anyway.

for the suggestion of teaching school children about masterbation.

http://newsbusters.org/node/13137

PLUS, pot prisoners are less violent and easier to keep then REAL criminals, especially those who tend toward copious alcohol use.

Private prisons don't need as many guards if there are more pot heads in the slammer. And they don't have to hire the best guards, nor spend as much training them if the prisoners are pretty passive.

Made in the USA labels on some items mean: Made with prison labor and we make you feel like you're helping your fellow Americans by buying our bullshit PR.

Jobs for police, judges, other court personnel, prison guards, etc.

And no one is going to give up those jobs they already have easily.

Don

Even some progressive Democrats aren't very progressive when it comes to legalizing marijuana. Very frustrating!

... and police state tactics

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

but I guess there must be a lot of private contracting going on with the narco-police state.

yeah, no problem when he was doing them

would eliminate more problems than it would create. Decriminalization, not so much. I support the former. But bullshit generalizations and false and or unsubstantiated charges about what's going on do not further the goal. If you can't use cannabis and stay real, you shouldn't be using; and, for sure, your opinion will be seen for what it is. Blessings.

but par for the course, really.

“Keeping drugs illegal reduces their availability and lessens willingness to use them,” the document, prepared by Drug Czar Gil Kerlikowske, says. “That is why this Administration firmly opposes the legalization of marijuana or any other illicit drug.”

It's 2010, dickheads - that statement could have been written anytime in the last 40 years.

Didn't you pay attention?

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

... we have Reps who are locked into supporting the lucrative $ecurity/police state over the backs of the people, against the common good

which I disagreed with (there were a few of those), you should just suck it up cause you knew about it. This argument was weak at the beginning of his administration and it is weak now.

and every time someone like you says, "weren't you paying attention?" I have to tell them, I'm wide awake and WILL NOT repeat my mistake of trusting a candidate's better instincts to change his position or to be the "forward-thinking" or "change-making" person he pretended to be. I'm wide awake now so that person has lost my vote.

I guess if the country had been paying better attention, he never would have been elected--is that what you're implying? because everything that comes up, it appears that the voters "should have been paying attention," or they would have known he wouldn't go for whatever it was.

He changed his mind about offshore drilling, too. And about a host of other issues.

Seems he can only "change his mind" when it benefits Special Interests at the expense of We, The People.

We should have known he was really a Corporate Whore? That "Hope and Change" should have been reserved for the Already Got Theirs? So he was just dicking us along to get a vote? Okie Dokie.

Thanks for your comments. :thumbsup:

:mad:

I'm now pretty fully convinced that he's a Trojan horse from the GOP.

No major candidate is going to touch that issue, despite all the reasons they should.

You say that "no major candidate is going to touch that issue" and are probably right. But then it occurred to me that no major candidate is going to touch ANY issue that matters to the working people. They will dabble around a little on some issues that they can't avoid, or where they see an angle to help corporations and wealthy people, and then try to lull and fool people about what they are doing, as they just did with health care. But they don't touch anything that would make a difference for working people. The right wing mouthpieces just need to yell "boo!!" and they run and hide.

Really, think about this. No major politician is going to touch anything that the working people desperately need.

I don't think much about the legalization of pot, haven't taken a stand and don't speak out about it. But you have changed my mind. Since they will not touch anything - will not only not give us anything, but will fight against us at every turn - we may as well ask for everything.

I support complete legalization of pot and will start speaking out for that and contributing to the cause where I can. Thanks for helping me reach a decision on this.

what "decriminalization" meant (the fact that he was once editor of the Harvard Law Review notwithstanding.)

Did you pay attention? :rofl:

the meme for everything is: you should have been paying attention because Obama never promised "x"--whether or not he really did--as though that means we should just shut up and blame ourselves for "not paying attention" when we voted against our own best interests.

they're still working on responses that point out the idiocy of that "argument"--kinda the way the baggers run to Limpballs for their lines.

Back it up. Put up the link or you're blowing steam out your ass.

:applause:

--something I'd forgotten about till I saw your post being "challenged"

so Brava to you, too! and thanks to WDI for bringing this to everybody's attention! :evilgrin:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

So brava( WTF is Brava BTW? Or did you mean the breast enhancement stuff?) to you for ignoring what was in the video.

Ignorance and denial rules!

Thanks so much!

Although I WAS looking forward to his explanation of how the video was doctored by radical leftists to make Obama look like a liar, or maybe how aliens living as Berkley students took control of Obama briefly and made him say something that wasn't 100% corporatist. That would have been entertaining.

I'm sure they'll come up with something along those lines

Decriminalization \= Legalization

http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/3/17/225516/066

PLEASE pay attention next time! :hi:

It looks like it's you who doesn't know what the hell he's talking about. Do you ever get tired of defending the indefensible?

he's gone on lunch break :rofl:

You know, the one where he claims that Obama has always supported a war against Eastasia.

You know, admitting when you're wrong is a sign of good character.

and two in your video he expressly states he is not for legalizing it.

See my journal entry from that time:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=2729853&mesg_id=2735812

I'm not able to find a video immediately, but I saw the debate with my own eyes, and the discussion about it here on DU kept up for a while afterward. Read the whole thread that my link is a part of, then get back to me...

-app

there was in the oct 30th debates and it was limited to this

Williams: Senator, thank you.

Tim Russert?

Russert: Senator Dodd, you went on the Bill Maher show last month and said that you were for decriminalizing marijuana.

Is there anyone here who disagrees with Senator Dodd in decriminalizing marijuana?

Senator Biden, Senator...

(Laughter)

Senator Edwards, why?

Edwards: Because I think it sends the wrong signal to young people. And I think the president of the United States has a responsibility to ensure that we're sending the right signals to young people.

you can read the transcripts here

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18296908/ns/politics-the_debates

He raised his hand on decriminalizing it not legalizing it its a small diference but still is the same as his statement in the video from 2004.

I think he is wrong I am all for legalization but I knew he wasnt when I voted for him and pretending that he was is silly.

You are correct about the date of the debate, and I thank you for finding the transcript link.

However, Obama going from a publicly-stated position of decriminalization in 10/07 to an anti-decrim position AND set of budget priorities (for all the talk of treatment and alternatives to prison, the Obama ONDCP is still heavily weighted toward enforcement and the prison-industrial complex as an answer to drug problems, real or imagined) is a BIG flip-flop. And what's worse, is that Obama went from being on the side that is Correct, Popular, and Constitutional to the side that is Wrong, Unpopular, and Contrary to the principles of personal Liberty on which this Country was founded.

-app

It's not like this is shocking.

supporting the legalization of pot. I think it's more popular than politicians think.

That's why we are not allowed to fully discuss this issue. The "war economy" that has built up around prohibition is too large and there is nothing else to divert those resources into.

Right, change. Uh-huh, fer sure.

Not only caving to Big Oil - Damn the OBVIOUS problems with their practices, but caving to the folks who make fortunes, and create violence, running drugs.

So, what LEGAL substance does one have to ingest to believe this is any sort of change?

Hell, if we have to give up the beaches, marine life, and deal with out of work fishermen and resort personnel, we might be easier to deal with if we could get some pot. Some of us don't like alcohol and it's tendency to make people hostile.

...and prohibition is no more efficacious than it was in the '20s.

I'd rec your reply if I could.

If we had known he'd carry forward so many Bush-Cheney policies, he'd still be a senator from Illinois and we'd have our first woman president. I don't know that she'd have been any different on this issue, but at least she wouldn't pretend to be something other than what she is.

now I regret that I was so virulently anti-Hillary, because I thought she was too "status quo"
but I suppose anybody who wasn't culled out by the PTB (read: Howard Dean, Dennis Kucinich) is the same anyway--otherwise, they wouldn't be options on voting day.

he pretended that his would be a "forward-looking," "innovative," "new" administration.
he pretended that the little people who contributed small amounts of money and large amounts of time were actually important to him.
he used phrases like "Yes WE can" to pretend he was "one of us"
he pretended he would get rid of the influence of lobbyists and corporate blood suckers in government.
he pretended a lot of things--but gee, he never came out and openly pretended to be "for" mj legalization -- so I guess we shouldn't have expected him to be forward thinking, progressive, or a real "Democrat" on this issue, right?

believe me, I was over Obama like yesterday--everything about him is "pretend."

seriously.

I.E., classifying things no major politician would ever do as some sort of newfound disappointment in Obama's case, as if "change" entailed doing something as politically dangerous as pot legalization.

but he gave the impression that things were going to be "different," that We The People would be running things now, that there would be a new basis for decisions besides what would profit the bloodsucking corporate interests, that in fact corporate interests would no longer be running Washington (we found out that was just so many words). He wanted ideas from the people. He wanted to know what issues mattered to them the most. His own website found out that legalization of pot was the #1 thing that people wanted, and he laughed that off without even considering it, as though The People were a joke.

I take "change" to mean CHANGE, not doing everything the way it's been done for the 8 years before he came into office.

He had a mandate for CHANGE, and he had the whole world behind him. If he WANTED to, because of his gift of eloquence, his popularity, and his supposed "brilliance," he could steer the country in new directions. He would have a majority of the population solidly behind him. But he has chosen to follow the same old non-ideas of corporate plunder, war, waste, environmental ruin, unregulated greedy capitalist pig corporations, and criminal charges and incarceration for possession and use of a freaking PLANT. If someone had been in office with his attitude and way of doing things in 1963, we would still have a form of apartheid in this country (which we do, for gays, when you think about it). He is just ineffectual and ordinary. There is nothing bold or courageous about him.

And I don't think a small sample of people voting on his website is indicative of anything. I very seriously doubt more voters are concerned with legalizing pot than they are with jobs, the economy, health care, etc. Most likely, it was a small sampling of people under 30 who tilted the vote that way.

For the record, I am fully in favor of legalizing pot. I just don't see it happening any time soon.

I think you underestimate the power of the younger generation as well as the tolerance of older people (I'm 64 and a huge pothead, and I know I'm not the only one in my generation--in fact, I believe it was my generation that really brought pot "out of the closet"--certainly more aboveground than in the days of the beatniks--what with Haight-Ashbury, hippies, and civil rights/integration, which began the overt mixing of cultures).
the biggest stumbling block would be the incessant media propaganda. but I think, just as people under 30 provided a swell that really made a difference for Obama, a candidate in favor of pot legalization would have tremendous popular support--but it would have to be someone with the talent to fend off the attacks from the loonies who would try to use that to discredit him or her. and it couldn't be the ONLY thing in the person's platform or the most important. It would have to be part of a list of truly progressive stands, and of course the person would have to have some kind of "official" backing, one party or the other, because unfortunately a reality here is that ONLY a republican or a democrat has a realistic chance of becoming president. Obama would have been able to fit that into his agenda, I think, without much problem, but it is probably too late now, unless he were motivated for some reason to take a new stand on the issue--to "come to his senses," which is what it would amount to.

Also consider that many republicans are totally in favor of legalizing pot, and don't forget the so-called libertarians, many of whom can't stand either party but make legalized pot a core belief.

legalized pot is only inevitable with each new generation, as more and more people experience it and wonder what the hell the fuss is about and see how ludicrous, and how damaging, to make it criminal.

You're right about the media attacks, but the sad reality is that anything else Obama would want to accomplish would be totally overshadowed by the "He's selling drugs to our kids!" nutjobs/commentators. All the political agility in the world won't prevent those people from being heard.

I'm 30 myself, and I'm glad most people my age and younger are increasingly liberal, but the current climate won't allow this to happen. Senior citizens are the most reliable voters, and they do not favor legalization as a group. And no offense to my peers, but I'm not willing to bet they'd show up in enormous numbers for this. And the number of pro-pot Republicans and libertarians would be minimal.

Even going the decriminalization route is risky, but if Obama were to tackle the issue, he should start there. I think pot will be at least decriminalized by the time I reach your age, though.

It would be yours. Thank you for encapsulating in seven lines exactly why I have been so utterly frustrated since November of 2008.

Anyone who doesn't believe you speak the truth above is kidding themselves.

Returning to the original subject of the thread: We don't smoke anything. We're not into it. At the same time, I think marijuana should be legalized.

Otherwise she wouldn't have been allowed to be a front-runner at all. :/

most of whom agree with legalization.

On this issue, he is ignorant, backward-thinking and cruel. But i suppose power does that to everyone.

We "little people" are thrown in jail for a PLANT while the greatest thieves, murderers and torturers of our time run the show, free and rich as kings.

FUCK YOU white house. The War on Drugs is destroying America's families, (did Obama see the dog shot in front of the seven-year-old over a little PLANT MATERIAL? That's fucking LEGAL? To traumatize a kid for LIFE over a PLANT?) and the white house thinks that's just peachy.

FUCK YOU, The New WAR ON AMERICA ADMINISTRATION!

I am the Queen of Chill, Baby.

But I can also be very pissed over the Obama Administration's stance, and I AM!

I know, I know, these days it's not "cool" to give a shit. Everybody should be a flat affect zombie.

But I'm an old school fighter from way back.

The War on Drugs is destroying our nation.

i have seen too many lives destroyed.

You don't care? yay for you!

Just get the hell out of my way...

i love how you suggest I do something illegal to cope with being upset that it is illegal


cognitive dissonance much?

include the Oil industry, Big Pharma, and the Law Enforcement, Industrial Prison and alcohol and tobacco lobbies.

No matter how many billions all these groups blow through trying to suppress the use of cannabis, Americans continue to use it in large numbers. The PTB KNOW they can't win against it.

So they cruelly exploit people's personal pain - whether it is mental or physical or both - like bloodsucking leeches. Rather than having mercy on the suffering or granting liberty to the American, they demand his money or else.

It's Shakedown Time for those not complacent enough to get hooked on toxic alcohol (like every staunch Repuke I know) or Pharm's "MayCauseSuicidalThoughtsAndStroke" products or religion's drydrunk agony or Media's longrunning hate-fest.

Anyone unwilling to become addicted to THEIR products must become a slave of the state, stripped of all rights, children taken away, made to work for twenty two cents an hour for the corporations, without even the little right called the Vote to effect any change at all.

The War on Drugs is Corporation vs American, for absolutely damned sure.

And the White House has clearly stated that it is not on the side of We The People.

That is sad and wrong.

god only knows how many police officers.

this or any other policy position he might adopt.

Nothing to see here.

I wish that weren't the case, but it is.

In a pathetic sort of way.

x(

...and made people willing to use it.

Oh, wait.

Nobody's buyin' this propaganda. Get with the times, man!

Big oil, the war on drugs, the war on terror -- THIS is all the shit that's bringin' this country down.

A plant that may prevent cancer is NOT the problem here.

on this issue anyway.

The Federal representatives have ALL been "bought and paid for" but not so for the states. Excellent point. Go California!

:eyes:

What a bunch of disingenuous bullshit. Thanks again for the lack of balls Mr. Obama.

Yup: total cowardice.

eating pizza.

The Horror!!

I sure am glad I voted for you..:sarcasm:

Corporatist!

And I'm sick and tired of goal posts being moved and retracting statements he's made in the past. Billions of dollars are wasted every year due to marijuana prohibition and millions of lives are ruined because of it. There's no good reason for it and I'm sick of it. It sounds like you're using a snarky reply to defend these new statements. If that's the case, you're defending the indefensible. There's NO excuse for continuing things as they are.

The REAL reason for the opposition is the added strain that a loss of drug-related enforcement revenue would cause on a local and state level. This would result in higher local and state taxes during a Dem administration, which in turn would harm Obama's and other Dems chances at re-election.

J

He's probably never watched a relative writhe in pain so much that they actually vomited either. I have. He's probably never watched someone on so much LEGAL pain medication breathe so slowly you were worried they might not survive the night. I have.

Come November be prepared to hear them squeal like stuck pigs?

No sympathy for the devil. :evilgrin:

He admitted past drug use, but he wants other drug users punished? Doesn't he realize that it was just luck that he didn't get caught and punished? He wouldn't be president right now if he was busted. How hard is that for him to figure out?

Does he think he is above the rules and policies that he espouses? It sure seems so.

What a huge hypocrite! He is disgracing his office, and betraying his base, but since the Dems are ahead in fund raising, I guess the ends justifies the means. Good job, Rahm and Obama. How very DLC of you.

Pathetic.

Video: Barack Obama on Marijuana Decriminalization (2004)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/10/19/new-medical-marijuana-pol_n_325426.html

Also never heard him say he supports legalizing it...

crappy law designed to protect the Hearst family and their acres of trees they wanted to use (not hemp) for their newspaper business. Fuckers.

If we were CRAZY VIOLENT like alcohol fans were during prohibition, it WOULD be legal. How fucked up is that? We just peacefully want the right to choose a substance other than crappy alcohol. Not only do we not have that right - we risk getting thrown in jail for it! I have no idea why people tolerate a government that cares so little for OUR wishes. :grr: :mad:

off those illegal drugs...and keeps the prisons full.

Obama isn't going to rock that boat. Too bad.

I'm not saying legalize crack...but pot? It's the God/Goddess given way to deal with the stress of Life.

Prove it.

as studies on the effects in Portugal and de facto decriminalization in The Netherlands have shown.

Obama never chooses to take a principled position.

our prisons are just FILLED with 72yr old cancer patients... good call

She had to go to the emergency room. Personally, I wish she would stop using, it doesn't add anything to her life--just a waste of money.

Edited to add: I think drugs should be legal--it should be a person's choice, but I think all drugs are a waste of brain function.

No, I don't have panic attacks since taking refuge...but hopefully, you get my point.

Recreative use of cannabis or, for example, psylocibine have more positive effects then negative.
unfortunate, I have to stay away from cannabis because it almost ruined my life.

behave like everyone was out to get him when he did it. It was troubling, and yet he still kept using it. I agree, it's a choice people should be able to make. I don't consider in a 'drug class' par with other man-made drugs but it's still something that should be monitored. The criminalization of it has to end. And hey, if increases in true schizo behavior, violence, accidents, and crimes go up when it's legalized, then people will have to admit what many see that they refuse. This guy I knew swore he could handle his weed, like they all do. His friends were blazed and wrecked and caused major damage to a passenger's legs. I am absolutely for medical cannabis, and I don't understand why people would want people to suffer who could use cannabis to feel so much better, that's a shame!

I appreciate your added comment, but in a country that claims to value "personal responsibility," it is totally criminal to make use of a PLANT "illegal" and ruin people's lives over it.

bustinG 72-year-old cancer patients for eating MJ Brownies... Stop lying. That is NOT their policy.

It is going to pass in California so please keep your ass in DC.

What more can I say?

:shrug:

I see ZERO change from this clown.

allow me to copy and paste from above, because, for me, this sums up everything about him:

he pretended that his would be a "forward-looking," "innovative," "new" administration.
he pretended that the little people who contributed small amounts of money and large amounts of time were actually important to him.
he used phrases like "Yes WE can" to pretend he was "one of us"
he pretended he would get rid of the influence of lobbyists and corporate blood suckers in government.
he pretended a lot of things--but gee, he never came out and openly pretended to be "for" mj legalization -- so I guess we shouldn't have expected him to be forward thinking, progressive, or a real "Democrat" on this issue, right?

believe me, I was over Obama like yesterday--everything about him is "pretend."

:crazy:

he can't "legalize it" just on his say-so, but he could try to make a case for it. sheesh.
but no, it is far too profitable for the unsavory elements of our society to keep it illegal--and there is not one good reason that can be given to keep it that way.

There's a video right on this thread.

the hallmark of stupidity is inability to foresee long-term, larger consequences--either positive or negative.

I guess he's unable to see the positive long-term consequences of legalizing pot, in terms of taking the criminal element out of it, of adding tax dollars to the public coffers, and of reflecting the will of the people.

then there is also that inability to see that Prohibition didn't work and never will.

so, yes, I would have to agree that his "brilliance" is definitely overrated.

I think he just doesn't give a shit.

He's a placeholder until the Republicans get back into power, and probably knows it.

one, including Obama.

Sigh.

from the drug importers which would stop if it were ever legalized. Notice how they never bust the big drug guys, just the consumers...

mark

many somebodies, I'm sure.

and it has become crystal clear to me that the only thing that matters to Obama is that those he's really working for are making a PROFIT, no matter who else has to suffer. In that way there is nothing different about him than the previous GOP administration--that was also their whole raison e'etre.

for the big guys in the business?


mark

are wrong.

If we look at the Netherlands as an example. First time marijuana use is higher here where it is illegal. This should tell us something. It is a lesson I don't think the administration wants to learn. There is too much money being made on illegal drugs. Organized crime wields a powerful influence in this nation. But keeping these drugs illegal serves no good purpose.

This sucks...

And yet he is President but would destroy the lives of millions AND their innocent families.... for political points and expediency.

BAAAAARF, Mr. Obama, BAAAAARF!

but I do agree with:

"No Mr. Obama.... keeping drugs illegal causes a black market and gang violence.

What part of the Volstead Act did you not learn?

Thanks for the "Change", Mr. Obama. Keep on busting those 72-year-old cancer patients for eating MJ Brownies... they are so violent."

There's a tipping point. It's coming. It cannot come soon enough for me and I suppose many of you.

to incredible anger, disappointment, frustration, anger and just more anger.