Obama has become more hostile to medical marijuana patients than any president in U.S. history

[pscot]

To put Obama’s implosion in perspective, consider what Texas Gov. Rick Perry (R) wrote in his 2010 book “Fed Up!”: “When the federal government oversteps its authority, states should tell Washington they will not be complicit in enforcing laws with which they do not agree. Again, the best example is an issue I don’t even agree with — the partial legalization of marijuana. Californians clearly want some level of legalized marijuana, be it for medicinal use or otherwise. The federal government is telling them they cannot. But states are not bound to enforce federal law, and the federal government cannot commandeer state resources and require them to enforce it.”

Perry also wrote, “If you don’t support the death penalty and citizens packing a pistol, don’t come to Texas. If you don’t like medicinal marijuana and gay marriage, don’t move to California.”

The five presidents from Richard Nixon through George H.W. Bush allowed medical marijuana research to proceed unhindered.

The three presidents from Jimmy Carter to George H.W. Bush allowed patients to apply to the federal government for waivers to use medical marijuana legally under federal law.

Obama appears to be to the right of Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Ronald Reagan and even George W. Bush on this issue. It’s hard to imagine how this helps Obama politically, and it’s easy to imagine how forcing patients to purchase their medicine from an illicit provider instead of a regulated business hurts people who are suffering from cancer, AIDS and multiple sclerosis.

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/05/06/opinion/what-made-obama-attack-medical-marijuana/

[/dov]

[fuddyduddy]

1. As a MMJ patient, I agree with this.

Obama is on the wrong side of the history with this one.

Big time, and that's a major turn-off for me, as I am a patient, and it has helped me tremendously.

Obama has repeatedly ignored his own polls and petitions to get it legalized. He himself has tried marijuana.

What is wrong with this picture?

I believe it's the corporate claws that has gotten ahold of Obama. Only time will tell if Obama stops going to the right.

The Democratic Party was never meant to go to the right. Ever.

If we have reached to the right, then we are no longer the Democratic Party

[Logical]

2. He needs to explain this. He really does! n-t

[SammyWinstonJack]

3. +1.

[pscot]

6. It's the Congress' fault

They pass these awful laws and he has no choice but to go around intimidating doctors and medical dispensaries. He explained it to Jimmy Fallon last month. His tone was strikingly dismissive; almost contemptuous.

[truedelphi]

77. So how do you explain the fact that there is legislation that allows Holder to

Wake up Monday morning, walk into his office and classify Marijuana from its Class One status to a less lethal (legally speaking) class schedule of drug.

If Holder doesn't want to do this, then the President can retire him and replace him.

Obama has not only criminalized Medical Marijuana here in California, he also betrayed the latino population by sending (or letting so many) be sent back south of the border.

Between the number of people he has allowed to be deported, whose family members do vote here in California, and the number of people seriously depressed, scared, angry, now that Obama's DOJ and IRS have stripped away the people state-approved right to have medical marijuana, he might not win California by a landslide, but by a squeaker.

Just who is advising him on this? Is losing the state of California the way he wants to go? Doing the right thing, in this case, would also be the popular thing. Are the donations from his buddies at Big Pharma , Big Prison Industries, and Big Bankers worth losing California?

[pscot]

100. Holder is on a very short leash

He does whatever the President tells him to do. There is no freelancing in this administration. They are buttoned down tight. By this point in the Bush administration, Woodward was on his 3rd book.

[truedelphi]

118. I beg to differ. I mean, currently he may be on a leash,

But some years back, before Obama was even a gleam in the world's eyeball of political reality, Holder was working for people who had been involved with south of the border death squads.

I doubt it bothers Holder one bit what will happen here. Before the state of California voters went ahead and approved medical marijuana, you had prisons with little old women with MS in wheelchairs. The drug kingpins were able to edge out of lengthy sentences, because they could snitch on their associates. Grandmas had no one to snitch on, and the DEA didn't think they would help them out much as going undercover on the mean and gritty streets of Gangland USA.

And if Grandma did beat out her drug sentence, she often forfeited her home to the lawyers that defended her.

[xiamiam]

191. i agree with you and it is baffling. California residents have fought a long hard battle

for medical marijuana and he seems content to roll the clock back. I don't get it. His stance is outdated, I just dont get it.

[truedelphi]

219. My heart feels very heavy when I think about his actions.

As someone who worked with the elderly, I had to be very careful. On three separate occasions in the early nineties, I was approached by senior citizens asking me to obtain marijuana for the friend of theirs that I was taking care of.

I had to tell them - if you want them to have this, and they agree, you need to get the substance. I can't afford to lose my license and/or do jail time.

I also couldn't even mention to a client that marijuana would offer them relief for things like tremors due to MS. I was so relieved when finally the voters in the state overwhelmingly approved of having medical marijuana available.

People have this concept that California is super liberal and that we all run around doing pot constantly. That picture of reality was contradicted by the stories NORML had on their website of all the grannies sitting in their wheelchairs in prison for the crime of having used marijuana for their MS. The state-approved legalization of medical marijuana should have changed all that.

[rfranklin]

78. It is politics pure and simple...he will be crucified if he supports marijuana use in any form...

Let's get real, the right wingers would kill him on the issue.

[Dragonfli]

88. You are saying it is prudent to trade 3 Democratic votes to get one conservative to vote for him?

I hate to break it to you or him, the conservatives he is courting will still not vote for him.
Who cares what they think?

[Webster Green]

137. I disagree.

I don't think it is the political hot-button it has been for so long.

Everyone knows that the feds are lying about cannabis having no medicinal value. That is why so many states have been successful with medicinal cannabis bills.

Obama should be smart enough to figure it out, or stop worrying about politics and just do the right thing. He said he would (no, not specifically about pot), even if it cost him a second term. He is clueless on this issue.

[Bonobo]

173. 100% correct.

And for Obama, in this particular case, winning is more important to him than the hundreds of thousands of lives he is destroying with petty drug arrests and condemning people to chronic pain and painful deaths.

[FrodosPet]

196. Marijuana does not seem to be left vs right

Some of the biggest stoners I have ever known have been right wingers, and some of the biggest anti-MJ people I know are liberal Buddhists.

Even politically - look at the difference between Diane Feinstein and (omg) Rick Perry on this issue.

[tru]

208. rfranklin

The people who oppose marijuana medical use wouldn't vote for Obama unless the Devil was running against him. And maybe not then. You'd think he'd know that, but time and again he apparently thinks he can win rightwing votes and so he gives away more of the store and gets nothing back.

[rfranklin]

216. Well, if my analysis is wrong, he wouldn't vote for himself!

But, I think he is just keeping as many angles covered as possible. I am hoping that he may loosen up when he is not facing reelection. Of course, many of us have been deeply disappointed with his approach to the loony Republicans.

[FedUp_Queer]

210. Exactly.

Because, you know, the "right-wingers" are so powerful. The president is so weak. Oh, wait. He's playing chess again. Gee, I hope he doesn't detain me indefinitely under the NDAA. Wouldn't it be nice to see a Democrat stand up to these big, bad "right-wingers" instead of peeing their pants whenever any "right-winger" goes "BOO!"?

[truedelphi]

217. Only 23 to 25% of all Americans are

Fond of voting Republican. Maybe even less than that in California.

He is playing to a "majority" that doesn't exist. It will hurt him the same way that it hurt Kamela Harris in her run for the California Attorney General position.

I certainly have no idea why he doesn't understand that he won the 2008 election exactly on account of the progressive statements he made in Wisconsin in October of that year. he relies far too much on his advisers. He had 70 million voters approving of those statements. Or maybe Bill Hicks was right about the video they show the newly elected President once they are about to be sworn into office?

[LanternWaste]

223. I suppose if Susan G Komen politicized healthcare, we all should...

I suppose if Susan G Komen politicized healthcare, we all should... for the sake of politics if not healthcare (because we know which is more important?).

[Tsiyu]

4. Expect to be flamed for telling the truth

And then you can expect to be told to "work with what you've got" like a toddler being patted on the head.

You can't work with someone who refuses to acknowledge there is a problem.

Obama is no idiot. He knows from all the input he has received from voters that this is a major issue with the American public (whether the authoritarian "grownups" want to admit it or not.)

So why is Obama ignoring the American public?

It makes no sense unless.......

[ProSense]

5. This is

Obama appears to be to the right of Ron Paul, Gary Johnson, Ronald Reagan and even George W. Bush on this issue. It’s hard to imagine how this helps Obama politically, and it’s easy to imagine how forcing patients to purchase their medicine from an illicit provider instead of a regulated business hurts people who are suffering from cancer, AIDS and multiple sclerosis.

...such bullshit!


I mean, when Obama responded (http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=642280):

President Obama, who was recently interviewed by Rolling Stone magazine, weakly defended his administration's practice of aggressively raiding permitted dispensaries by claiming that "there haven't been any prosecutions" of medical marijuana patients. President Obama conspicuously avoided the question of why he was using Justice Department funds to carry out a campaign against medical marijuana that not only contradicts a campaign pledge, but has also far surpassed that of his predecessor President George W. Bush. Obama's Justice Department has conducted more than 200 SWAT-style raids on dispensaries and growers in at least 9 medical marijuana states since he took office in January 2009.

...it was a fact.

<...>

The raid came during the waning days of the Bush administration, as signals from Obama of a soon-to-come change in federal marijuana policy made the future of enforcement uncertain. During Bush's presidency, DEA agents conducted more than 200 raids in California alone. But even with a new administration in place, the federal government's approach to medical marijuana has remained inconsistent. Since 2008, federal raids have occurred in Los Angeles, San Diego, Bakersfield, and other cities that license medical dispensaries. As with the previous administration, the selective enforcement of federal laws is something of a mystery.

http://www.eastbayexpress.com/ebx/medical-marijuana-dispensaries-in-legal-limbo/Content?oid=2044006

<...>

During the Bush years, the DEA raided more than a hundred California dispensaries, sometimes merely seizing their medicine and cash, sometimes prosecuting their operators and sending them to federal prison. But the DEA has also gone after a medical marijuana organization in Washington state that supplied starter plants for its members, used a federal grand jury in Oregon to obtain patient records, and even threatened New Mexico officials planning to implement that state's medical marijuana distribution program.

In Thursday's raid, DEA agents hit the Holistic Solutions dispensary in South Lake Tahoe, seizing cash and medical marijuana. They made no arrests.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2009/jan/23/medical_marijuana_dea_hits_calif

The prison population for drug offenses climbed 28 percent under Bush:



Source: http://drugwarfacts.org/cms/?q=node/62

It increased slightly in 2009 and 2010, but has been dropping slightly since.

February 2012:

Drug Offenses: 95,528 (48.7 %)

March 2012:

Drug Offenses: 94,899 (48.5 %)

http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp#1

That's the the lowest number of drug offenders since 2008.

The percentage is down from about 56.3 percent in 2000, and is at a pre-1990 low.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002430710

[Logical]

7. "It increased slightly in 2009 and 2010, but has been dropping slightly since."

You act like the increase in 2009 and 2010 is no big deal but the drop since is a MAJOR DEAL!

Prosense, your defense of the indefensible is unbelievable!

[ProSense]

8. What?

"You act like the increase in 2009 and 2010 is no big deal but the drop since is a MAJOR DEAL!"

I did no such thing. The fact is that it's now below 2008 levels and is not growing at 3,000 to 4,000 per year.

"Prosense, your defense of the indefensible is unbelievable!"

WTF? Don't just say anything. Deal with the facts.



Oops, math.

[Webster Green]

25. Sometimes the DEA just comes in, and steals all your meds, cash, computers and then leaves.

Sometimes the federal attorneys go to the landlord of the dispensary, and threaten to take his building away.

My good friend, until very recently, ran the oldest dispensary in the state, in Marin County. She decided to pack it in, after constant harassment from the feds, including the IRS, and because of the threat to her landlord, who she had a good business relationship with. She also had the full support of the town of Fairfax, and the Fairfax Police. She was not arrested (yet), but the business was still destroyed, and her patients are denied their meds.

Drug arrest statistics are interesting, but pretty much irrelevant to this discussion.

Some of the owners of raided dispensaries could still be charged, even if they were not arrested and charged at the time of the raid.

Obama has ramped it up. It's real simple and obvious. I know you will never believe it though.

[Tsiyu]

29. Webster G: Do you think this has the potential to cost Obama CA?

I'm curious as to the sentiment there and in other states where Obama has allowed the DEA thugs to destroy successful businesses.

What's the talk on the street?

[grantcart]

34. The talk on the street?

Everybody knows that anybody with $ 120 can get a Doctor's note and buy Marijuana.


Here is the map of dispensaries in San Diego


http://legalmarijuanadispensary.com/index.php?option=com_jreviews&Itemid=117&url=N-San-Fernando-ValleyTujunga-Dispensaries/california-dispensaries/central-san-diego-clubs_c142_m117/

Show me on that map a 2 mile square area that doesn't have atleast 4 outlets.

Even the dipensaries were saying that it is getting out of hand. You will note that most dispensaries deliver.

Yep real real oppressive shit there.

[SidDithers]

39. Good reply...

Sid

[Webster Green]

42. Oh, it's been great.

There are less of them every day though, that's the problem.

There is some real oppressive shit going on.


"Even the dipensaries were saying that it is getting out of hand."

Boo-hoo. Maybe they didn't like all the competition.

[Uncle Joe]

95. I wonder if they're targeting particular dispensaries just to allow favored people to gain

monopolies?

There seems to be no rhyme or reason for targeting only some and not all of them when the ones being targeted are in compliance with state law.

These actions make no sense to me, unless the feds are trying to shape ownership of this market.

[pscot]

102. They may be defending the oxycontin monopoly.

[Uncle Joe]

104. If that were the case, wouldn't they be going after all the MMJ dispensaries

instead of just some of them?

I believe the feds know which way the wind is blowing in regards to MMJ and probable legalization of cannabis.

That's why I'm beginning to believe they're just choosing who the ownership of this new market will be.

[pscot]

165. That would be tantamount to operating at the molecular level

Unless they're trying to keep the cartels in busness. Even I am not that cynical.

[Uncle Joe]

179. Not from the local officials' point of view.

Do you know if any of these businesses that have been raided or shut down have been charged with anything or prosecuted

[grantcart]

107. From 420 College

http://www.squidoo.com/Medical_Marijuana_Business_In_California

Medical marijuana business in California is a multi-billion dollar industry, with the American west, as it's epicenter. College 420 sees this as the new force, which will help stand the state's economy back on it's feet, and are offering knowledge and empowerment for individuals who wish to be a part of that development.

Due to the 1996 Proposition 215 in California, residents can obtain a valid doctor's recommendation to use cannabis for medicinal reasons. This also enables a resident to launch a medical marijuana dispensary business in California if they desire to. A Medical marijuana dispensary streamlines the transaction process among legal medical marijuana patients.

Medical marijuana businesses are not too difficult to operate, you just have to know what rules to follow just like in any other industry. There are different ways of getting into the medical marijuana industry with the help of a medical marijuana school called 420 College.





Now for those that are using the rules to make profits and run around the non profit registration, yeah those guys are going to get the feds after them

http://www.marketplace.org/topics/life/prosecutors-marijuana-dispensaries-make-too-much-money



This list shows 1500 brick and mortar dispensaries and 500 delivery dispensaries.

http://medical-marijuana-dispensaries.findthebest.com/d/d/California

So try and concentrate here. The point of the subthread was what does the 'street' think.

Anybody in CA that wants to get legal medical marijuana has no trouble getting whatever they need.

As with everything there will always be somebody that gets greedy and fucks it up but if you want to buy MJ in California get a note from the doctor, have a credit card and make a phone call.

[Uncle Joe]

111. Have any of them been charged or prosecuted for making a profit

and skirting non-profit laws?

[Comrade Grumpy]

56. Show me a map of all the dispensaries in Riverside or San Bernadino or the Central Valley....

There aren't any. Patients in large portions of the state are without access to their medicine.

That's because reactionary Republican local offiicials work with the feds to go after the dispensaries in those areas.

[grantcart]

99. bullshit complete total bullshit

here is the map for Riverside

http://legalmarijuanadispensary.com/index.php?option=com_jreviews&Itemid=117&url=East-Bay-Dispensaries/california-dispensaries/riverside-cannabis-clubs_c55_m117/order:featured


I called three dispensaries all open doing great business.

This one said that there are about 4 dozen dispensaries, doing a great business and have no problems if they stay with in the regulations


http://legalmarijuanadispensary.com/dispensaries/california/riverside/4thand20

Call them and argue with them

951 823 5874

total involved to find someone who would talk to me on the phone about selling me medical MJ in Riverside.

2 minutes and 45 seconds

[Comrade Grumpy]

116. Well, I have to eat some crow. There are indeed dispensaries in Riverside.

There are even some listed in Fresno, but it looks like they are all just delivery services.

Still, the dispensaries are under assault, and it's by no means all Obama's fault. In places like Riverside County, they are being raided on a regular basis, and most of the raids are by local cops, although not all.

We do have reactionary local officials across the state who want to stomp them out. Sometimes they work with the feds to do so.

[truedelphi]

222. Sometimes a person has to wonder how if there is a god,

he wouldn't help those who refuse to listen to reason come to understand what is at stake.


But in any event, thank you for trying to keep people informed.

It made my day.

[fuddyduddy]

80. In Colorado it's $35 now plus another maybe $75 for Dr eval

I usually get a $50 Dr eval, and I will get it before the end of November.

[marlakay]

197. My step daughter and fiance both have cards

in mid 20's, no problem for them to get one and or supplies.

My husband has a card up here in WA and no problem with our local spot either (although I found it odd they are telling everyone who goes there not to vote for legalizing it) we still plan too.

[Webster Green]

40. Not a chance.

CA will overwhelmingly go for Obama.

Hell, I have friends in Humboldt who love the black market prices to be high. We're in a transition period right now, where the market is still glutted with pot, since growing got so wide open for awhile. As more legal operations are shut down, the black market price will rise again. Lots of people are fine with that.

It's a big issue for a lot of people here in CA, but nowhere near big enough to effect the presidential election.

[Tsiyu]

48. That's good to hear, I suppose

I do long for the day we have a true progressive in the White House.

[bemildred]

72. Yep.

I predict zero effect on the election here.

[Comrade Grumpy]

52. Not California, but Colorado could be interesting, and maybe New Hampshire

The new Libertarian Party nominee, Gary Johnson, is very strong on drug policy reform.

Colorado and New Hampshire are both battleground states.

The Obama administration has been squeezing the dispensaries in Colorado.

Colorado has pot legalization on the ballot this year, and New Hampshire has also had a lot of pot politics going on.

These could be places where Obama's bad stance on medical marijuana could cost him votes and make a difference in who wins the state.

[Tsiyu]

57. That's the real concern here

No one has to convince me. I'm a 53-year-old die-hard Dem.

But I really worry that if Obama doesn't throw a bone to at least MMJ, that the youth vote, the cancer vote (yeah, I made that up, but cancer is an epidemic in this country) and several states' votes, are going to be lost in November.

We need every vote.

[marlakay]

199. I agree, I will vote for him too

but worry the kids are pissed, the gays are not happy, the peace niks are not happy…

if we are counting on just the responsible people…ugh...

[Tsiyu]

204. well, i do believe cannabis users, gays and peace niks are responsible people

not that you were saying otherwise.

I am just having trouble explaining to people why Obama has stepped up these raids. I will not lie to convince another person to vote.

Obama needs to figure out PDQ how to frame this issue so that voters can believe he will keep his promises.

Using cannabis - whether medicinally or recreationally - is not some moral failing nor is it a criminal act any more than buying a bottle of ibuprofin or a six pack is morally wrong or criminal. But Obama continues to treat it as such, and I can no longer reach people who are taking Obama's stance personally.

To be told it's a non-issue doesn't jibe with what I'm hearing from disgusted voters I know.

[marlakay]

224. Wow did I frame that wrong!

But truth be told i really making a put down of all the dumb people in America that believe propaganda or get influenced by a tv ad.

[fuddyduddy]

82. Yes on Amendment 64, and then prepare to sue the U.S. Government for failing to follow the 10th

if they try to overturn the 64.

[truedelphi]

126. No one I know in my circle of friends

is willing to happily vote for Obama. Some older friends of mine will vote third party.

Others will vote for him, while holding their noses.

The sentiment keeps getting expressed - we were better off in the final days of the Bush regime, because there was both hope and the possibility of change in the air.

Now so many people realize that the system is gamed. We watch as family farms fold up all around us. This on account of how the biggest of the bailed out banks that were helped out by wiping out our retirement monies refused to lend money to small farmers.

We watch as 255 billions of dollars is accounted for, by our government letting us know that it went into modernizing our military. And into offering up weapon systems to members of the UAE and Israel. At a time when Tim Geithner wouldn't consider LOANING 20 billion to California.

Obama has gone from being a man who received 70 million votes from people who believed in him, to a man whose good buddy Tim Geithner is still at this post at Treasury. One of Obama's problems is not just the internet, but that in rural areas across America, the TV stations carry hundreds of channels to watch. Many channels feature programs that detail the economic devastation to our country, caused by both parties as they collude to steal the wealth of the middle class. And there are TV programs about Monsanto. And about the continual up tick in military programs, and in military surveillance of the nation's citizens.

[Tsiyu]

130. That really concerns me the most this election season

(although the suffering of people due to the War on a Plant is one of my top concerns, as far as the election goes I worry about this issue the most.)

I, too, know a lot of kids who are completely disenchanted with Obama. They become the casualties of this war. They can have their entire futures destroyed. Why would they care to re-elect a guy who thinks that's just peachy?

Then add the assault on Medical Cannabis and you've got another large subset of voters who are personally VERY negatively impacted by what Obama chooses to do.

None of these voters gives a rat's what we say on DU. But we on DU should give a rat's about their votes. And we can't convince them that Obama is a rational, sane leader on this issue. He's not.

He's directly defying the will of the American people. How can you convince people to vote for a guy who won't even listen to their concerns and expectations about MEDICINE?

You can't.

[RainDog]

128. 2009 was the year marijuana arrests accounted for the majority of drug arrests

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2010/sep/19/drug_arrests_top_16_million_last

You're talking about people in prison with your stats - not arrests. Whether someone gets a conviction or not is the second phase - the first is arrests.

US law enforcement agencies arrested 1,663,582 on drug charges last year, according to the FBI's annual Uniform Crime Report. That represents a slight decrease from the previous year.

Of those 1.6 million arrests, 858,408 were for marijuana offenses. Marijuana arrests thus accounted for 51.6% of all drug arrests, making 2009 the first year pot busts accounted for more than half of all drug arrests.

Of the marijuana arrests, 758,593 were for pot possession, while 99,815 were for sales or manufacturing. Thus, more than 88% of all marijuana arrests were for possession and more than 45% of all drug arrests were for pot possession.

Overall, drug possession arrests accounted for more than 81% of all drug arrests. Fewer than one in five drug arrests were for drug trafficking or manufacture.

Marijuana Prosecutions For 2010 Near Record High

http://norml.org/news/2011/09/19/marijuana-prosecutions-for-2010-near-record-high

Police made 853,838 arrests in 2010 for marijuana-related offenses, according to the Federal Bureau of Investigation's annual Uniform Crime Report, released today. The annual arrest total is among the highest ever reported by the agency and is nearly identical to the total number of cannabis-related arrests reported in 2009.

According to the report, marijuana arrests now comprise more than one-half (52 percent) of all drug arrests in the United States. An estimated 46 percent of all drug arrests are for offenses related to marijuana possession.

"Today, as in past years, the so-called 'drug war' remains fueled by the arrests of minor marijuana possession offenders, a disproportionate percentage of whom are ethnic minorities," NORML Deputy Director Paul Armentano said. "It makes no sense to continue to waste law enforcements' time and taxpayers' dollars to arrest and prosecute responsible Americans for their use of a substance that poses far fewer health risks than alcohol or tobacco."

The reality is that most of these arrests are occurring at the state level - for instance, New York had a huge increase in marijuana possession arrests - that, again, targeted minorities.

However, at the level of medical marijuana facilities - that's coming from the Federal Govt. So is the harassment of politicians who indicate support for mmj. So is the harassment of banks that are willing to accept dispensaries as patients. So is threatening state employees with prison for doing their jobs registering mmj facilities. So is threatening landlords to confiscate their property if they rent to a dispensary. So is the harassment of growers who are complying with state regulations - even if they're not arrested, their businesses have been destroyed.

That's also harassment - but I suppose it's "nicer" than an arrest - esp. considering the show trial aspect of such an arrest in the state of CA and the horrid P.R. that would pose for Democrats - not to mention such actions are against the wishes of local democratic parties.

When the San Francisco Democratic Party has asked Obama to stop the harassment, maybe it's a problem. when legislators in Washington State have asked Obama to reschedule cannabis to allow them to implement laws that people have voted to enact, maybe it's a problem.

When the overwhelming majority of Americans, for more than 20 years, has indicated they want legal medical marijuana, maybe it's a problem for the DoJ to harass people who are enacting provisions allowed by vote in various states.

If the law were based upon something other than bullshit - I could understand - but the reality is that the law was intended, from the time of the Tax Act, to target minorities and to eliminate competition for fat fucker industries. The intent to target minorities and liberals continued with Nixon and escalated with Ronnie Raygun, once he needed the votes of the talibornagains to win elections.

So, who the fuck cares if convictions are down when the law itself is one of THE most glaring examples of bad law that no one seems willing to address because it might make some pin headed Newt supporter upset?

[Tsiyu]

133. Thanks for adding this

i tried to gather the same info but my cheesy dialup kept freezing up.

I think that people destroy their own credibility when they cherry pick facts as was done.

Better to say, "hey, I like OBAMA but the dude is wrong on this issue" than to go through all sorts of contortions to make Obama seem fair, sane and rational when it comes to Medical cannabis or legalization of cannabis in general.

He is neither fair, sane nor rational when it concerns medical cannabis or the War on Drugs.

He is being cruel, obtuse and arrogant.

[ProSense]

153. Well,

"Police made 853,838 arrests in 2010 for marijuana-related offenses"

...you're comparing apples and oranges. The information I presented is specifically federal.

[RainDog]

155. I noted that exact thing.

And also noted that convictions don't really indicate what's happening because convictions may depend upon lawyers, deals, etc...

Arrests provide a more accurate view of the status of cannabis at the level of law enforcement at this time. Law Enforcement in the U.S. goes after easy targets and boosts arrest records, rather than actually spending time and human resources dealing with crimes that the nation considers, you know, criminal - and not just because a law is on the books.

most people do not consider possession of marijuana worth the harassment that occurs in this nation.

as I also noted, the harassment from federal level law enforcement has targeted banks, public employees, landlords...

This has been a concerted effort across a variety of federal agencies, such as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, the IRS, the DEA and the DoJ.

While they may not have arrested many of those people, they have ruined their legally-operated businesses and have intimidated people who live in places in which its citizens have taken the only route they have, the vote, to change bad laws.

It seems to me that the San Francisco Democratic Party might not have spoken out about this issue if it wasn't a concern for their constituents.

When the Washington State legislature engages in an historic moment and tells Obama to reschedule so that the 16 states, plus DC who have voted to make medical marijuana legal may enact their laws - it seems to me that pointing to a decrease in convictions isn't really the issue, is it?

[earthside]

10. That damn Pelosi ...

... undercutting Pres. Obama!

ProSense better set Nancy straight.

Why Nancy Pelosi is Right to Slam Obama's War on Pot - AlterNet.org

Since President Barack Obama took office, “more than 200″ state-approved medical marijuana facilities have been raided, according to Kris Hermes, spokesperson for Americans for Safe Access (ASA), who spoke to Raw Story on Thursday.

“That exceeds the number of raids his predecessor, George W. Bush, oversaw during his entire eight years in office,” he said.

The startling statistic wasn’t lost on Pelosi either, whose statement comes just days after she received a petition by marijuana patients in her district. ...

[ProSense]

14. So

"ProSense better set Nancy straight. "

...where did Pelosi say that "Obama has become more hostile to medical marijuana patients than any president in U.S. history"?

I mean condemning the raids is one thing, but opinions cannot erase the facts.

[Logical]

11. Prosense, are you actually claiming the Obama administration is NOT increasing Medical....

Marijuana crackdowns?

YES or NO?

[fuddyduddy]

83. *crickets chirping*

Point made.

[RainDog]

129. ProSense picked stats to favor an argument she wanted to make

She focused on actual convictions rather than the actions that may or may not have led to convictions.

This is classic political cherry picking to try to make a claim that's not supported by other indicators.

[ProSense]

154. Oh bullshit!

"She focused on actual convictions rather than the actions that may or may not have led to convictions. "

There is separate data for non-federal arrest and convictions, and overall data. The information I posted is specific to federal law enforcement.


People are making up and mixing up the information to push their own agenda. The OP is about federal policy, not state.

[RainDog]

157. Federal policy determines drug schedules and laws

and, as I noted, convictions are a poor indicator. arrests tell more about what's happening with law enforcement.

The point, to me, isn't this particular article or any other one, however.

The point is that this is bad law and the attempts to address this reality are succeeding at the state level, since the Federal level politicians and bureaucrats are so pigheaded and backward they will not.

It's simply bad law and, like other blue laws, it should be ignored and overturned.

[Webster Green]

12. It is not bullshit!

"But last year the tide turned. Obama’s Justice Department authorized a series of letters from U.S. attorneys across the country threatening to “vigorously” prosecute individuals acting in compliance with state medical marijuana laws. In some cases the U.S. attorneys suggested that government employees who help regulate their states’ medical marijuana systems could be prosecuted for “facilitating” a crime.

There was more. The IRS cracked down on medical marijuana dispensaries, refusing to allow them to deduct such standard business expenses as rent and payroll. Last September the National Institute on Drug Abuse refused to provide federally grown marijuana to a Food and Drug Administration-approved research protocol seeking to measure the extent to which marijuana helps combat veterans with their post-traumatic stress disorder. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives outlawed gun sales to medical marijuana patients. And federal prosecutors in California announced that they would crack down on dispensaries across the state, saying that they intend to seize the property of landlords who lease space to these businesses that are legal under state law."

I'm a cannabis activist, and I live in California. I've worked at dispensaries. What we are seeing today is unprecedented, and that is a fact.

You don't know what you are talking about. You just need to defend Obama, no matter what. It would seem that you think the man is perfect in every way, and incapable of anything less than perfection in all that he does.

Very sad!

[happynewyear]

15. +1

You are very correct. He is a flawed liar IMO.

[ProSense]

18. Yeah,

"Obama’s Justice Department authorized a series of letters from U.S. attorneys across the country threatening to “vigorously” prosecute individuals acting in compliance with state medical marijuana laws."

...I read that piece before, "threatening." The President said there have been no prosecutions, and the facts back him up.

Bush, on the other hand, conducted significant raids that led to many prosecutions and a significant increase in the prison drug population.

Those are the facts.

[Webster Green]

30. Dispensaries are being shut down , and patients are being denied their meds.

It has greatly increased recently under Obama/Holder.

Stop talking about prisoners and shit.

[Comrade Grumpy]

62. Tell Tom Daubert there have been no prosections.

He lives in Montana where he had a career as a political consultant and lobbyist. He campaigned for medical marijuana there and opened the Montana Cannabis dispensary after it was legalized there. He was caught up in the March 2011 DEA raids that swept the state. He just pleaded guilty and is looking at up to 20 years. The family that were his business partners were just sentenced to federal prison terms, including a five-year sentence for a physically and mentally ill 68-year-old man.

There may have been no prosecutions of patients, but plenty of people who were operating businesses in compliance with their state medical marijuana laws--who Obama said the feds were going to leave alone--are being prosecuted and imprisoned.

[pscot]

74. Yeah, well the letter sent to Washington

evidently made a believer out of Chris Gregoire and the state AG. My own doc acknowledges the value of MMJ, but is afraid to prescribe it. You don't need to whack someone with a 2x4 to convey a threat. Obama's DOJ have created a climate of fear around the use of MMJ that didn't exist during the Bush residency. Deny that!

[marlakay]

202. Same here

our local doctor knew it would help my husband but she was afraid to prescribe it, so he had to go out of our small town to find a doctor. He has his card but it says a lot that doctors know it works and can't use it.

[fuddyduddy]

85. Fact.

http://reason.com/blog/2011/06/30/white-house-overrides-2009-mem

Your argument holds no water, ProSense.

You're just propping up your President as in perfectly supporting legal MMJ, when there are evidence that he IS not supporting it - the DEA raids has to end, and the order to the U.S. Attorney has to be made to end all MMJ prosecutions effective immediately and rescheduling pot to the same level as tobacco and alcohol.

All that requires a signature of Obama to reschedule it.

Why won't Obama sign that EO rescheduling pot, permanently?

[ProSense]

171. Fact:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=284179

[truedelphi]

221. Thank you for supporting with facts the people

Who need medial marijuana, and the overwhelming majority of people in the state of California who voted to legalize it.

[tru]

212. ProSense

You think threats have no effect?

"Last month, Rhode Island Gov. Lincoln Chafee suspended plans to license three such dispensaries after U.S Attorney Peter Neronha sent him a letter warning that they could lead to prosecutions." http://www.630wpro.com/Article.asp?id=2202622&spid=38784

[Tsiyu]

13. Oh, you're posting that same shit again

that just makes everything all better....


No need to discuss the issue, no need for Pro Sense to admit this is a problem, no siree.

I get so sick of obfuscation....I really do.

Obama is WRONG WRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONG
WRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONG
WRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONG
WRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONG
WRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONGWRONG on this issue.

Whether it suits your narrative or not.

See what I did there?

[ProSense]

16. Oh

"Oh, you're posting that same shit again"

...the facts bother you? Too bad!

[Tsiyu]

20. Cherry picking facts is a Republican habit

Your "facts" suit your narrative. They do not equal the "math" nor do they tell the truth.

I'm sorry your favorite guy is WRONG. I'm sorry you are so in love with the guy you can't see the harm he is doing.

If you want to make a difference, why not contact Obama? Trying to sell us bullshit isn't going to help Obama. It only makes you look like a Repuke-style political sycophant.

[ProSense]

23. Actually,

"Cherry picking facts is a Republican habit"

...making up shit and stomping your feet is "a Republican habit." Ask Rove.

[Tsiyu]

26. Right. We're all making shit up. Sure.

Whatever works for you.

Look, I realize this issue is one of those "inconvenient truths" for you. I realize you are completely unable to admit that Obama is wrong about anything.

But I am neither "making shit up" nor "stomping my feet." I'm too damned tired for foot stomping.

And I'm tired of seeing lives DESTROYED because humans did the same thing Obama did. I'm TIRED of feeling like a criminal for needing a plant that helps me.

You have no compassion, it appears. Or it has been erased by your sycophancy.

I really feel very sorry for you.

[ProSense]

31. Stomping feet meets condescension. n/t

[Tsiyu]

36. Yes, you do stomp your feet a great deal

******"Obama is right no matter what! Cuz I SAY so!!!!" (yelled at top of lungs while stomping feet on floor)**********

And I'm sorry if you feel I was condescending...I do feel sorry for you, though, even if you haven't a shred of compassion for me.

Peace and good luck.

[LanternWaste]

225. I would have imagined your already well acquainted with that

I would have imagined your already well acquainted with that.

(insert clever deflection here...)

[Comrade Grumpy]

47. Obama deserves credit for supporting reducing the crack-powder cocaine sentencing disparity...

...which probably accounts for most of the decrease in federal drug prisoners.

But he deserves scorn and opprobrium for his turnaround on medical marijuana, and he's getting it in spades.

[rug]

71. What's changed in the last six months?

Medical Marijuana Industry Is Unnerved by U.S. Crackdown

By ERIK ECKHOLM
Published: November 23, 2011

UKIAH, Calif. — An intensifying federal crackdown on growers and sellers of state-authorized medical marijuana has badly shaken the billion-dollar industry, which has sprung up in California since voters approved medical use of the drug in 1996, and has highlighted the stark contradiction between federal and state policies.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/24/us/medical-marijuana-target-of-us-prosecutors.html?_r=1&pagewanted=all

[fuddyduddy]

79. Your pretty blue link and graphs are irrelevant as long as Cole memo exists

As in this:

http://reason.com/blog/2011/06/30/white-house-overrides-2009-mem

So, until the Cole memo is rescinded, permanently - Obama burdens this responsibility of spreading the lies that Obama supports MMJ.

What's more - more and more states are accepting marijuana in part of their society - and for most, it is a cash crop.

Obama's WH petitions #1 subject was MMJ - many times over, and it's being ignored in favor of Pharma. Obama made this error by working with Tauzin (a R scumbag)

So, Prosense, despite the facts and figures, the results are still the same - DEA continues to raid dispensaries.

Legal dispensaries who follow California law to the letter.

[ProSense]

139. Interesting.

http://reason.com/blog/2011/06/30/white-house-overrides-2009-mem

So, until the Cole memo is rescinded, permanently - Obama burdens this responsibility of spreading the lies that Obama supports MMJ.

So a June 2011 memo earned Obama the OP title?

Let's check this claim from the OP commentary

<...>

The shift has been clear. Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. announced in March 2009 that the Obama administration would end the Bush administration’s practice of raiding medical marijuana providers that violated federal statutes. A memo from the Justice Department later that year said the department would not prioritize prosecutions of individuals acting in compliance with state medical marijuana laws.

Through 2010, that policy seemed to work. Maine, California, Colorado and New Mexico took steps to regulate the distribution of medical marijuana at the state and local levels. Other states had similar plans in the works.

But last year the tide turned. Obama’s Justice Department authorized a series of letters from U.S. attorneys across the country threatening to “vigorously” prosecute individuals acting in compliance with state medical marijuana laws. In some cases the U.S. attorneys suggested that government employees who help regulate their states’ medical marijuana systems could be prosecuted for “facilitating” a crime.

Now from the link you provided (which by the way is a RW site):

When I asked the White House in 2010 if continuing to raid medical marijuana dispensaries--which it had been doing less often than under Bush, but more often than never--a senior staffer told me, "Yes – that enforcement is focused on those incidences where both federal and state law are being violated – and is therefore focused largely on drug traffickers. It has not spent its limited resources on ind. patients with cancer and other serious disease."

The piece links to the Daily Caller.

Based on theses sources, the 2009 policy Obama put in place worked "through 2010." The raids were "less often than under Bush," and, from the link in the above piece, "There was a time under the Bush administration that "the DEA and U.S. Attorneys" were quite proud of their attempts to undermine state marijuana laws."

All in all, some really fascinating spin has been pursue since the Obama DOJ issued a memo in mid 2011.

At least the facts I presented are consistent.

[noiretextatique]

213. president obama vs. candidate obama

unlike bush and others, candidate obama seemed more interested in respecting state laws. splitting hairs about clubs vs. patients, and convictions vs. arrests doesn't change the fact that president obama seems to have a different policy than candidate obama suggested he would.

Quotes from the campaign trail

“My attitude is if the science and the doctors suggest that the best palliative care and the way to relieve pain and suffering is medical marijuana then that’s something I’m open to because there’s no difference between that and morphine when it comes to just giving people relief from pain. But I want to do it under strict guidelines. I want it prescribed in the same way that other painkillers or palliative drugs are prescribed.” — November 24, 2007 town hall meeting in Iowa

“I would not have the Justice Department prosecuting and raiding medical marijuana users. It’s not a good use of our resources.” — August 21, 2007, event in Nashua, New Hampshire

“I don’t think that should be a top priority of us, raiding people who are using ... medical marijuana. With all the things we’ve got to worry about, and our Justice Department should be doing, that probably shouldn’t be a high priority.” — June 2, 2007, town hall meeting in Laconia, New Hampshire

“You know, it’s really not a good use of Justice Department resources.” — responding to whether the federal government should stop medical marijuana raids, August 13, 2007, town hall meeting in Nashua, New Hampshire

“The Justice Department going after sick individuals using [marijuana] as a palliative instead of going after serious criminals makes no sense.” — July 21, 2007, town hall meeting in Manchester, New Hampshire



Read more: http://www.gazette.com/articles/promises-117589-campaign-marijuana.html#ixzz1uCMvOXdx

[truedelphi]

122. Obama's policies are just kicking in.

Right now, what those polices are hurting is the availability of the medical marijuana clinics to the customer. As clinics have shut down, some 2,500 well paying jobs have been lost. Many of these jobs are in rural areas, where there is little likelihood of the newly unemployed finding work.


Consider also the hit the economy in California is taking:
Additionally, right now, what is under threat is the state's economy. I know of four clinics that have closed. And this area I live in is a very minor area - only 90K live here.) It is not just the medical marijuana patients still needing their drugs that happens to be an issue. But also, the landlord who received rents each month, and who then paid taxes to the state. The local newspapers that received monies for advertising and that now are afraid to take any advertising dollars, or it too might be shut down.

The state of California received some 125 millions of dollars from the clinics and the certified growers. Additional monies went into the local cities and towns and counties. These amounts will be cut back severely, at a time when th4e Obama policies will not help in any way.

Oh, but it obviously is not about the morality of using drugs - readers of the "Press Democrat" have been told that if they need medical marijuana - soon it will be available to them (with a prescription) from a pharmacy in Great Britain.


Way to Go, Mr Holder, and Mr Obama. You two figured out how to hurt the state of California again. And to outsource a set of jobs that no one three years ago ever believed would be outsourced!

[randome]

124. I don't know about the jobs lost. I really don't.

But I have to wonder how many critically ill cancer patients there are in a given area. Are there really enough to support full time jobs? (Not that the loss of part-time jobs is anything to sneeze at, I'm just wondering.)

[Tsiyu]

135. Cannabis also helps PTSD, MS, other neurological problems

such as Parkinsons...the list is extensive. It is an effective analgesic, anti-anxiety med, appetite stimulant, etc.

AS someone with no health insurance, very poor, Cannabis could help me ease my own symptoms very cheaply. As it stands, I can't afford any kind of medication but aspirin, and I'm afraid to be a 53-year-old CRIMINAL just because I like to eat and not feel pain after working a very physically demanding job.

There are millions like me who are uninsured or underinsured, and we would choose this very cost-effective treatment hands down if it were made legally available.

But you only get to have your pain and suffering eased in this country legally if you have health insurance and can afford Pharmco's overpriced shit drugs.

[randome]

138. Thanks for the info.

[RainDog]

141. Epilepsy, MS, CP, rheumatoid arthritis, glaucoma

migraines, nausea, neuropathy, anorexia, depression, anxiety...

are some of the other uses and, in many of these cases, cannabis provides the best medicine for people who deal with these illnesses.

also, when illness hurts you financially, marijuana is an affordable treatment, unlike pharmaceutical drugs, and it has fewer negatives associated with it.

it's amazing that people are okay with drugs that have HORRIFIC side effects or may kill someone - but if that drug is marketed to them by a corporation, some people are a-okay with it.

it's an example of how stupid people can be.

or how too many people are sheep who accept what any authority figure tells them.

that's why they support drugs that are harmful and oppose one that is not.

[truedelphi]

220. It is not just about cancer patients. It is about people with

Rheumatoid arthritis, people like Lynnette Shaw. Google her and the expression "medical marijuana."

It is about people with MS.

And yeah, it is also true that some people just like to be stoned. So what?

But hey, why not fill up our jails with people who smoke pot? We cannot afford our schools, or our fire districts or garbage collection or water utilities - but hey - let's help the Big Bankers succeed in their profit driven motives of having the state's prison populations explode. At 33,000 bucks a year per inmate, wouldn't we all like California to become the next AZ, where prisons are the main industry?

Who needs schools? Who needs Fire fighters? Just put us all in jail.

And meanwhile the bankers can continue to launder the drug cartel monies. This is who Obama and his stupid polices on marijuana are helping: Big Banks, Big Prison Industry, Big Pharma and just about everyone but the average citizen.

[tru]

211. ProSense

The Obama administration in the person of Holder intimidated my state into not having medical marijuana dispensaries after the state government legalized it.

You don't think think that's anti? How many people who need this for medical reasons either have no clue how to get it other then from dispensaries or aren't going to risk their lives going into obvious areas where it's sold on street corners or risk jail when the Attorney General says they'll be jailed. Especially the old and infirm who are among those who need it most.

[stupidicus]

215. what?

proof positive that he can't refuse to enforce/defend certain laws contrary to his claims, like DOMA for example http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=obama%20administration%20will%20no%20longer%20defend%20doma&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CGIQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.cbsnews.com%2F8301-503544_162-20035398-503544.html&ei=2fKnT__zBInlggfp_KjDCw&usg=AFQjCNEh8YkcGyU2_Xbt_TcDltzIbkajCg
or that he can't change the scheduling that makes maryjane what it is?

Rulemaking proceedingsStages in rescheduling proceedings
Filing of Petition with DEA
Acceptance of Petition by DEA
Initial Review by DEA
Referral to HHS
Scientific and Medical Evaluation by HHS
HHS Report to DEA
Evaluation of Additional Information by DEA
Publication of DEA Decision
(Judicial review by the U.S. Court of Appeals)
(Public Hearing on Disputed Matters of Fact)


The United States Code, under Section 811 of Title 21,[17] sets out a process by which cannabis could be administratively transferred to a less-restrictive category or removed from Controlled Substances Act regulation altogether. The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) evaluates petitions to reschedule cannabis. However, the Controlled Substances Act gives the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), as successor agency of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, great power over rescheduling decisions.

After the DEA accepts the filing of a petition, the agency must request from the HHS Secretary "a scientific and medical evaluation, and his recommendations, as to whether such drug or other substance should be so controlled or removed as a controlled substance." The Secretary's findings on scientific and medical issues are binding on the DEA. The HHS Secretary can even unilaterally legalize cannabis: "f the Secretary recommends that a drug or other substance not be controlled, the Attorney General shall not control the drug or other substance." 21 U.S.C. § 811b.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Removal_of_cannabis_from_Schedule_I_of_the_Controlled_Substances_Act

I'm afraid you're on the wrong side of this issue, and all "facts" in the world aren't gonna erase the bigger picture those you use are but a small portion of.

During the 2008 campaign, Barack Obama raised hopes among those who support medical marijuana by pledging to respect state laws on the issue. But his administration has reversed course and massively escalated the federal government’s attacks on medical marijuana businesses, most of which are legal under their states’ laws.This is perplexing because medical marijuana is far more popular than Obama is. A Washington Post-ABC News poll from January 2010 found that 81 percent of Americans supported legalizing medical marijuana. A CBS News poll from October found that 77 percent of Americans support allowing doctors to prescribe marijuana for serious medical conditions. By contrast, the president’s approval rating last October hovered around 42 percent — and is currently about 47 percent.

http://bangordailynews.com/2012/05/06/opinion/what-made-obama-attack-medical-marijuana/

It's all about perceptions at this point, and the prevailing perception is he's screwing the proverbial pooch on this one.

[edhopper]

9. There are things that Obama

doesn't support that he should. Like stronger Wall Street reform or Single Payer health care.
But then there are issues like this and Gay Marriage, where he is simply on the wrong side and needs to change his position.

[saras]

17. Obama is more anti-medical-marijuana than any other president has been anti-illegal-drugs

The medical model was utterly fringe when Nixon acknowledged that it deserved honest research.

It's as obvious as aspirin now, and Obama is still fanatically against it.

[ProSense]

21. Well

"The medical model was utterly fringe when Nixon acknowledged that it deserved honest research. "

...thank Nixon for launching the war on drugs: http://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/justice-served

[Logical]

22. Prosense, are you saying the OBAMA admin is NOT increasing attacks on Medical Marijuana?? YES/NO?

[Tsiyu]

24. Apparently he or she does not want to actually discuss the issue

The poster seems to want us all to agree with the poster's position or shut up.

Ain't democracy wunnerful?

[ProSense]

35. Hey,

The poster seems to want us all to agree with the poster's position or shut up.

Ain't democracy wunnerful?

...I offered my opinion and some evidence. You're stomping your feet because I posted some information. Seem you're the one who wants other people to "shut up."

No one is preventing you from discussing the issue. If you can't deal with other people's opinions maybe you shouldn't be on a discussion board.

[Tsiyu]

45. Not believing your charts and 8x10 glossies doesn't mean I

"can't deal with your opinion."

As for foot stomping, you seem to be the only one hot and bothered in this thread, Dear.

[fuddyduddy]

86. Then go back up, Prosense, and answer our questions

We know you're just evading the questions that was posed to you, and yet ignored.

Gee.. who does that remind me of -- oh that's right, Barack Obama on MMJ.

[ProSense]

28. Look

"Prosense, are you saying the OBAMA admin is NOT increasing attacks on Medical Marijuana?? YES/NO?"

...President Obama promised to cut down on the raids, the fact that they are continuing is wrong. They have been increasing troughout the course of his administration. That does not mean his record should be used to whitewash Bush's, which was atrocious, and the very reason people were demanding an end to these raids.

So if your question is that he has conducted more raids than Bush, the answer is no. The facts are the facts.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=650957

There is no need to distort or embellish the facts. Doing so doesn't make the raids more wrong.

[Webster Green]

33. Heh. Your link just goes back to your original post?

Well, that settles it then.

[ProSense]

38. Yes,

"Your link just goes back to your original post?"

...it does. I thought about reposting the facts again, but decided a link back to them would do.

[Comrade Grumpy]

66. In three years, Obama has matched Bush's eight-year total.

And most of the raids have come in the past year.

So, yes, Obama has gone from being reasonable on medical marijuana to being very bad.

[Webster Green]

69. It is so obvious....if you happen to live in ground zero, as I do.

I've lived in Humboldt, Mendocino and Sonoma Counties for over 30 years.

Obama and Holder are fucking tearing it up here. Anyone who denies it is delusional.

[Comrade Grumpy]

101. I'm in Sonoma County. Who am I going to believe, ProSense or my lying eyes?

[Webster Green]

105. No shit! Not to mention Debbie Downer calling my friends crooks.

After all the shit they went through to comply with all the fucking rules. Taxes, permits, meticulous accounting. This is such bullshit!

We are regressing, not progressing. We've been set back many years now in CA. It's very depressing. I'm rolling up a fatty!

[GeorgeGist]

51. So you concede ...

that Obama is to the right of Nixon.

[ProSense]

60. Where on

"So you concede ...that Obama is to the right of Nixon."

...earth did you get that notion?

http://www.aclu.org/drug-law-reform/president-obama-signs-bill-reducing-cocaine-sentencing-disparity

http://www.aclu.org/blog/criminal-law-reform/justice-served

Nixon fans are a trip!

[kestrel91316]

19. As a MMJ patient who has had fabulous results, I am particularly

resentful of Obama's aggressive steps against MMJ. I don't want to be a criminal. I'M NOT a criminal. But he'd put me in prison and destroy my career in a heartbeat if he thought it would further whatever cockamamie agenda he is pursuing.

I love the man otherwise, but am having a huge struggle with this aspect of his presidency.

[TheDebbieDee]

46. Obama's not after you or any other MM user with a prescription........

President Obama and the DOJ is after crooked-ass dispensaries selling marijuana on the side to people without prescriptions.

[Webster Green]

65. False.

Totally false. They are taking out legal operations as well.

[fuddyduddy]

89. Yup

My favorite dispensary was shut down two weeks ago because the feds claim the dispensary is "too close' to a school 3 blocks away - which the requirement is over 1000 feet - and it does meet the requirements (it is about 1,300 feet) away from the school zone.

And I refuse to recognize the school zone in that area - it's a private and religious school that has been around for many years. For that, I want them to pay $200,000/year for the privilege of being a school zone - they can certainly afford it.

Now I have to go to one that is 6 blocks away from a school zone, who has less choice and higher prices.

[kestrel91316]

119. If that were the case, MJ would have been rescheduled or

removed entirely.

"First they came for the trade unionists........"

[randome]

123. That doesn't follow.

Now you're talking legalization, not medical marijuana at all.

I don't think that's realistic. If we can push for decriminalization, maybe legalization would follow but I think pushing for both has not worked for decades and will still not work.

[RainDog]

158. you don't know anything about this issue

which you demonstrated yesterday regarding state medical marijuana laws and today with felony issues.

yet you are claiming to know what works and doesn't work?

[Jamaal510]

27. No offense,

but this is the zillionth "Obama is hard on marijuana users" thread I've come across this week on DU.

[Tsiyu]

32. Which should tell you something

When something is of interest, there are many posts about it.

How many Zimmerman threads did we have?

I really get amused at those who believe this issue will just magically disappear if we just don't talk about it.

[Webster Green]

37. And?

How do you feel about the issue?

[TheDebbieDee]

41. President O and the DOJ aren't going after Medical Marijuana users........

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/25/obama-marijuana-raids-rolling-stone_n_1451744.html

The DOJ is going after producers and operators of clinics that are selling MM to people without prescriptions on the side..........

According to the Rolling Stone article, President Obama is quoted as saying: "What I specifically said was that we were not going to prioritize prosecutions of persons who are using medical marijuana," Obama said. "I never made a commitment that somehow we were going to give carte blanche to large-scale producers and operators of marijuana -- and the reason is, because it's against federal law."

That's the 4th or 5th paragraph into the Huffington Post article.

[Webster Green]

44. That is false.

Plenty of dispensaries operating within the laws have been shut down.

Sorry, but I'm watching it happen. I know the people involved. I know the truth.

[TheDebbieDee]

67. I know this will sound Polly-Anna-ish but if these dispensaries

were operating entirely within the law, they wouldn't have been raided.

Something must have been going on there that the people you know don't know about.......

It could be violation of some tax laws (especially if the IRS participated in the raid), selling the products to persons without a legitimate prescription, any number of reasons that the people you know might not know about!

[Webster Green]

68. False.

Believe whatever you like.

I can't spend the day detailing why your assumption is incorrect, but I would suggest to perhaps not believe everything your government tells you.

[TheDebbieDee]

73. I was trying to be nice by saying that perhaps the people you know

didn't know what was really going on........but, point blank: The people you know are crooks! And that's why they got raided! Buh-bye.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

87. That is so naive.

I have experienced raids...nothing to do with marijuana...by government entities in their effort to shut a business down to favor another. I'm talking about picking winners and losers bio-diesel companies in Washington State.

After seeing what I have witnessed, I don't trust the (D) government anymore.

Please believe me; just because a business in raided by the DOE, fire marshal, heath department etc etc does NOT mean the outfit is polluting or operating without the PROPER permits in place. IT MEANS THE GOVERNMENT WANTS YOU OUT OF BUSINESS AND THEY HAVE THE POWER TO DO IT.

[Uncle Joe]

98. I posted something to that effect up thread before

I read your post.

[Boudica the Lyoness]

113. YES!

Read what you wrote up there. There are certain businesses that the government want to control. Bio-fuels and marijuana are two of them.

[randome]

127. If that's the case, why would they leave so many alone?

I still haven't heard from anyone who has given a reason for the DEA to shut them down.

Also, many of the raids were conducted at the request of local officials.

[Uncle Joe]

168. Why would the local officials ask for some of them to be shut down without filing charges?

Could local officials be getting their palms greased by the ones left unmolested?

In short if they're obeying state law, why have any of them shut down and if they're not obeying state law, why aren't charges being filed?

[theaocp]

94. Lemme follow this logic...

any time the gov't makes a raid = criminal activities. I think that speaks volumes.

[Webster Green]

97. Wow! Crooks?

No trial or anything?

OK then, Debbie. Thanks for playing.

[RainDog]

185. people like you make me want to stay home on election day n/t

[pscot]

75. If you're innocent, you have nothing to worry about

Pull the other one. It's got bells on.

[fuddyduddy]

90. Ahem. I check my receipts from MMJ dispensaries

I paid the taxes that are collected to Arapahoe County and the state of Colorado.

The feds are missing out on a important source of tax revenue - by continuing to waste money to raid and take away medication that are meant for legal MMJ patients.

[RainDog]

149. This is a lie.

the reality is that dispensaries, including one of the oldest that was working with local law enforcement, were raided, their plants were destroyed (each of of which, btw, had been labeled and inspected by the local sheriff to indicate the patient for whom it was grown)

So, please STOP BEING A SHEEP.

because, obviously, if the govt does something, it must be right, right? jesus. just ask those people who were tortured for no crime down in Guantanamo about that pov.

it's truly disgusting to see people attack because you care more about pretending the federal Democrats are on the right side of this issue than to admit that they are hurting people for NO GOOD REASON other than to continued failed policy.

[JonLP24]

152. You are correct

Regardless what state law says, it is illegal under federal law so no dispensary anywhere is operating entirely within the law.

[treestar]

92. That is hardly proof of anything.

You expect your blanket statement on the internet to have credibility?

[Webster Green]

228. Is this a court of law or a discussion board?

I have plenty of credibility as an eyewitness. You, on the other hand have already made up your mind about an issue that you have no knowledge of. I don't give a fuck if you believe me or not. If you want to defend the DEA thugs, go for it.

[treestar]

91. Thank you!

The amount of bandwidth used without even at least considering what the POTUS might have to say is appalling. It's tempting to say only Republicans would be this intent on opposing the President. One would expect liberals to at least hear him out.

[pscot]

108. One would also expect him to hear us out

If we could afford Billy Tauzin we might get a hearing.

[treestar]

142. I'm not talking about that

I'm talking about not considering both sides of any question and always choosing to believe the side trashing the President.

[MannyGoldstein]

43. So what?

Fox News would say really mean things if Obama did otherwise.

You purists don't understand that governing is about triangulating and pushing to the right, not about actually... governing.

Hey! Anyone up for some new "free" trade bills?

[Tsiyu]

53. You are so right on

I mean, we DO have to try to appease the Rightwing alcoholics and oxy addicts calling us all stoners. Cuz they wouldn't vote for Obama otherwise...

[AnotherMcIntosh]

61. Absolutely right.

What's wrong with the purists?

Don't they understand that they need to be patient, that he doesn't have a magic wand, that he's a master chess player, and that he'll get to their pet issue in his second term? Would they really be happier with President Rmoney?

Thanks for asking whether anyone is up for some new free-trade bills. There's one in the works. When signed, it will help all of us by lowering governmental costs when the Federal government buys equipment and supplies. Instead of being obligated to give priority and buy from American companies first, it will allow the Federal government to disregard that out-dated policy and buy equipment and supplies from companies in foreign countries. Do we need more free-trade bills? Absolutely.

[whistler162]

49. Thanks for the laugh...

[Webster Green]

55. I know. Hilarious isn't it?

Just like chemotherapy.

[tanyev]

50. Say what you will about current Obama administration policies,

but I hardly think that anything Rick Perry said in a 2010 book is an accurate picture of what a President Perry administration would actually do.

[frazzled]

54. In history? You mean the first since 1996

Because there were no states permitting the use of marijuana for medical purposes until then (California).

The drama queen quotient that surrounds this issue speaks for itself. It's sort of like the Republicans, always harking back to "history." I suppose we're going to be told now that the Founding Fathers supported medical marijuana.

History? More like hysteria. These posts aren't convincing anyone of anything.

[Webster Green]

59. Do a Google search about George Washington and Thomas Jefferson and cannabis.

Heh!

[Tsiyu]

63. Sure...it's hysterical when kids are rotting in prison over a plant

and when cancer grannies and soldiers suffering PTSD and MS patients can't have their favorite meds.

Funny Haha. We're just "drama queens" for caring about other humans' suffering. How quaint and hysterical...

Doesn't affect you, so who gives a durn.

BTW, your knowledge of the history of hemp/cannabis use in the US is a little dusty....but carry on with the insults. It will surely win votes in November.

[RainDog]

148. Cannabis was legal in the U.S. for longer than it has been illegal

Cannabis has been illegal only for the last 70 years.

Prior to that, cannabis was one of the major agricultural products in the U.S.

It was also part of every doctor's arsenal to treat various illnesses. Current research has proved out that the reason for those doctor's prescriptions, beginning in the 1800s, was valid. Since scientists have been able to study cannabis, they've found it's even more useful than previously understood, for a variety of medical reasons.

There's simply no reason for this prohibition except for BIGOTRY and IGNORANCE.

[Capt. Obvious]

58. More hostile than Chester Arthur?

I find that hard to believe.

In fact, that makes this whole piece suspect.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

64. Yes, considering Obama is the most hostile President to marijuana usage born in this country.

[Capt. Obvious]

70. Chester Arthur birthers

They were the worst

[Major Hogwash]

151. Hahahaha!!!!!!

Is that all you've got?
"Obama is the most hostile"?

:yawn:

[kenny blankenship]

76. Someone needs to look "tough on drugs"

He feels uniquely vulnerable.

[Nevernose]

81. In this issue, he's further to the right than Pat Robertson

There is no way he can back down even an inch on this topic, though. What will it look like to many people if a black politician is soft on marijuana enforcement?

I hate to be one of those "wait till the second term" folks, but on this one issue, politically speaking, he doesn't have much of a choice.

[RainDog]

112. Kurt Schmoke is a black politician who wanted to end the madness

He was mayor of Baltimore. Before that, he was Maryland's first Af-Am State's Attn. He was a man who had the courage of his convictions.

In 1987 - 25 YEARS AGO - he campaigned, as mayor, to end the war on drugs. He improved the conditions of the poor in that city, increased literacy - he walked the walk, he didn't just talk the talk. He's now Dean of Howard University Law School.

Obama should make him head of the DEA.

War on Drugs: Time for a Surge in New Thoughts

Imagine a civil war that has raged for 40+ years. A war that has claimed tens of thousands of casualties both at home and abroad, destroyed the lives of countless innocent bystanders, turned neighborhoods and in some cases whole regions into killing fields, filled prisons to overflowing, poisoned farmlands and forests, undermined police and government agencies, corrupted multi-national banks and financial companies, funded overseas enemies and terrorists, and despite the tremendous cost in blood and treasure has not advanced the cause for which the war was declared.

Of course we are talking about the so-called War on Drugs, escalated in 1970 by President Richard Nixon, with roots dating back to the Harrison Narcotics Act of 1914. Since 1970 the rate of drug use and abuse has not substantially decreased except for minor fluctuations that have never become permanent. In that same time, new drugs have come on the scene to claim new victims, and vast commercial empires have arisen built on drug money.

It's time to ask ourselves if our real goal is to reduce drug abuse or to provide business incentives for drug dealers? Illegal drugs are a global multi-billion dollar industry based almost entirely on illegal drug prohibition.

When our country tried the "noble experiment" of prohibiting alcohol in the 1920's, we learned that however well intended the effort, its effects were anything but noble. In the 13 years that Prohibition lasted, crime syndicates gained a permanent foothold, law enforcement experienced massive corruption, and drinking acquired an outlaw glamor that made it acceptable in places where it had formerly been shunned. This was all built on the profits of a mere 13 years. What have we suffered from the influx of several decades of illegal drug revenues?

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kurt-schmoke/war-on-drugs-time-for_b_928500.html

[randome]

84. So how did that Million Marijuana March go yesterday?

[Comrade Grumpy]

106. There was a GD thread about it earlier.

But I'm hearing 60,000 people in Buenos Aires, 20,000 in Toronto, 10,000 in Mexico City. Hundreds in Malta.

Haven't heard too much about the US, though.

[treestar]

93. George Washington didn't have a chance to weigh in on it, no doubt.

[kenny blankenship]

96. As a grower of marijuana, no doubt he would be aghast at Prohibition.

[pscot]

109. He would also be busted

The feds could confiscate Mt. Vernon.

[kenny blankenship]

110. Only from his cold dead hands!

They are really quite clammy.

[treestar]

143. What proof is there that he grew up and that he used it for medicinal purposes?

Or that he would have not enforced the law in any event.

[kenny blankenship]

150. His letters and diaries prove that he grew it. Good grief!

Are you really that ignorant of US history?

May 12-13 1765: "Sowed Hemp at Muddy hole by Swamp. Sowed ditto above the Meadow at Doeg Run"
August 7, 1765: "--began to separate (sic) the Male from
the Female Hemp at Do--rather too late."

The second entry suggests Washington was aware of hemp's "medicinal" properties. Separating the female plants before pollination results in "sinsemilla" which has a stronger concentration of the effective medicinal ingredients. It has no advantage or bearing on hemp as used for fiber for cordage or clothing and certainly no relevance to the use of hemp as a nitrogen fixing crop.

Whether Washington ever smoked pot for any reason or never smoked it for any reason, as a cultured person and business minded farmer he could hardly have been ignorant of its historical uses which have included smoking for thousands of years. Selling marijuana was part of the business that made Washington the richest farmer in the colonies. Calls for its prohibition would have doubtlessly have inspired him to the kind of agitation and mischief that Samuel Adams got up to when the British Parliament crammed surplus East India Company tea into the colonies, cutting out established colonial middlemen.

It's a G thing: marijuana prohibition would have hit G right in his cash box. And he didn't get to be number one without knowing how to hit back.

[treestar]

161. No I don't care about it that much I guess

So I never looked into it. It's silly to pretend it is common knowledge. However, what you have stated does not prove he smoked it or used it for medicinal purposes. "Hemp" was used for many things. And that he would not have enforced any law - no matter what he thought of it - is not proven at all.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hemp

[Webster Green]

177. You are not paying attention.

His interest in the female plants is an indication that he likely smoked the stuff.

Do a little research on the botanical properties of the plant, and you will discover what we're talking about.

The females are desirable for the flowers (buds). Male and female stalks are both good for making rope etc., but the girls are the ones we smoke.

[Tsiyu]

103. I think all of the founding fathers

(most of whom grew ACRES of hemp - another "inconvenient truth&quot would be aghast that Americans lose their right to vote for having only a few buds of the stuff.

But we can keep letting people be disenfranchised. Only straight, drinking, white, middle class conservative Dems can carry the party all by themselves.

WE don't need no stinkin stoners to vote.

I have some oceanfront property here in TN for sale, as well.

[randome]

114. So this isn't about medical marijuana after all, is it?

These threads ALWAYS go back to legalization. There are not enough people in America who give a damn about letting people get stoned.

Decriminalization, yes. Legalization, no.

As for medical marijuana, of course sick people should have access to whatever drug eases their suffering.

But I would like to hear from people whose dispensaries were closed down about what reason was given.

[RainDog]

115. not this bullshit again. n/t

[Comrade Grumpy]

117. Gallup: Record-High 50% of Americans Favor Legalizing Marijuana Use

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150149/record-high-americans-favor-legalizing-marijuana.aspx

But yes, I think these threads are about more than medical marijuana; they are about disgust with the drug war.

[kenny blankenship]

121. Yes but they are at a "record-HIGH"

The influence of the drug is making them biased. So we can just discount their drug-addled opinion even if it represents two thirds or three quarters or four out of five Americans. We only need to consult those level headed Americans with the right opinion. Best to ask before happy hour though.

[RainDog]

134. However, medical marijuana is more popular than Obama

More people support medical marijuana than support Obama.

Legal medical marijuana has consistently received more than 70% support across every region in the country for more than a decade, no matter who the president may be.

So, Obama's targeting of the medical marijuana industry across the nation, via the Dept. of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms, the IRS, the DEA, the DoJ... seems out of step with will of the people.

[treestar]

145. That doesn't make it legal automatically

They have to follow through by voting for people who will vote for repeal.

[RainDog]

147. Our political process is so corrupt

you can have a majority, you can vote for state laws that overturn bad federal laws, you can introduce legislation - but if one little dick in Texas wants to keep the bill in committee - then there it stays.

but, as others have noted, there are multiple avenues to overcome the stupidity of laws concerning cannabis and rescheduling is another way to undermine the right wing shitheads who choose to favor special interests over the American people.

Congress is not required in order to move cannabis from the current, incorrect scheduling. Why this has to be presented as a "political" issue is beyond me - it's a scientific and medical issue.

So, once again we let creationists and flat earthers determine policy in the U.S.?

that's really sad.

[treestar]

162. Oh baloney

What system should we have then?

That is it tough to change laws creates stability.

[RainDog]

175. We should have a system that doesn't hold science and medicine hostage to prejudice

what's going on right now, with the scheduling of marijuana, is an example of bad govt.

People in this nation want marijuana to be removed from Schedule I, as their votes on this issue, and the poll numbers indicate.

The reason people want marijuana to be removed is because they know cannabis has medical value and they don't want some bureaucrat's job to stand in the way of using the most beneficial and cost effective medicine - esp. in cases like chemo or HIV/AIDs. But not just those - as I noted, MS, CP, epilepsy - cannabis is a good and beneficial substance that helps people.

That's scientifically correct.

But no one at the federal level will deal with the reality of what science and the people in this nation are telling them.

That's an example of bad government.

[Tsiyu]

120. As the federal law stands now

there is absolutely no grey area.

Whether you use it for medicine or recreationally, you face the same penalties.

If you grow it to ease your uncle's chemo symptoms, the law views you the same as someone growing a plant to have a little party stash.

With a felony conviction for growing a plant, you can lose your property, your right to vote, to have a passport, to own firearms, often to leave your county of residence. You are disqualified from food stamps, student financial aid for college and from serving in certain capacities in the military.

And you're out a boatload of cash.

Sick or not.

It's all related, but I understand this is difficult for many authoritarian types to grasp.

[randome]

125. I'm sure as hell not arguing on behalf of ridiculous penalties.

Decriminalization is something I think most of us would agree on.

Unfortunately, it never stops there and if 50% of Americans agree with legalization, that means there is 50% who do not agree.

[Tsiyu]

131. My original point was concerning voter disenfranchisement.

You won't pass ANY sane laws if you take away the voting rights of millions of people. You will only pass laws to benefit the 1%.

Hmmm.......

[randome]

132. Understood.

But aren't those disenfranchisement penalties at the state level? I don't see anything regarding the federal level.

[Tsiyu]

136. If it's a felony conviction, yes, states' laws vary

but it's the FEDERAL CLASSIFICATION that makes the crime a felony to begin with. The financial aid etc are federal penalties I believe.

[RainDog]

140. A felony conviction takes away someone's right to vote.

So, yes, arresting people because of cannabis can result in them losing their right to vote. Most places have misdemeanor charges that move to felony charges upon a subsequent arrest.

The government is allowed to take everything you own, i.e. “Asset Forfeiture,” even if the charges are later dismissed or even if the defendant is acquitted (found not guilty) at trial if you grow marijuana for personal use or for someone who has cancer of AIDS.

The DEA murdered a man who grew cannabis for himself to allow him to keep down his chemo and HIV medications - because he spoke out about the stupidity of the law. He had to put his mother's house up for bail and she would've lost her house if he had test positive for cannabinoid metabolites. So, he stopped using marijuana to help him keep down the medicines that were keeping him alive.

He drowned in his own vomit.

That's the drug war for you right there.

[treestar]

144. The FF got stoned a lot?

[RainDog]

146. actually, hemp was one of the major crops in the U.S. for more of our history than not

People had to grow hemp (marijuana that is grown for industrial uses rather than THC content.)

Even after Anslinger made it illegal, FDR and the fed. govt pushed for states to grow hemp for industrial uses during WWII.

However, Washington did write about making sure to separate out the male from female hemp plants on Mt. Vernon. The only reason to do this is to increase the psychotropic properties of the female plants. For this reason, some people make the claim that Washington smoked cannabis.

The propaganda against marijuana has only been around for the last 70 years.

Before that, cannabis was a part of every doctor's medical bag, beginning in the 1800s, for many of the same reasons it is prescribed today.

Queen Victoria used it - so, why is it so impossible to think that Washington would have? Ben Franklin was experimenting with laughing gas over in England, along with the others who were behind the scientific and industrial revolution that was beginning at that time.

What's stupid is to think that, historically, people had the same attitude as people do now about this issue - the current views are the result of propaganda.

[Webster Green]

156. Exactly!

And great post. Seems like us activists are the few that know about Washington's instructions to keep the special female cannabis plants aside, which indicates he probably did smoke weed.

Cannabis is easily one of the most useful plants known to man, yet it is prohibited, due to total bullshit propagated in the last 70 years.

[treestar]

164. Hemp has many uses

And your attempt to turn Washington into a pot user is a real stretch.

[Tsiyu]

167. Your attempt to make the term "pot users" some sort of pejorative is just plain sad

It would be like calling everyone who has a scrip for hydro or Oxy a "pill-popping druggie."

I personally don't like (and can't afford anyway) to take pills, but I'm not going to de-humanize those who choose to use them to ease their symptoms.

Cannabis has been used for literally thousands of years. It's not some "new" treatment. But you know that already.

What you don't know is that older people like myself who don't want to get "wasted" on pills just to ease our symptoms are really getting sick of the insults and the snide comments and the classification as criminals, layabouts, "stoners."

I work a very physical job, for very little pay (not many decent jobs here in TN.) I am not out to "escape reality," or run with the criminal element, or make vast sums of cash off any criminal activity. I am a hardworking citizen who wants the right to use a substance my doctor and I agree will work for my particular symptoms.

Humans have been using cannabis for that reason since prehistoric times. It is no insult or stretch to claim that people during Washington's era used cannabis to relieve their symptoms. A large number of our modern pharmaceuticals are derived from plants that we can all grow in our yards.

I can grow poppies or foxglove for example (opiates, digitalis) but I am prohibited from growing even one cannabis plant.

You are the one who appears to be stretching the truth to fit in your narrow view.

[RainDog]

172. it's a stupid argument b/c it's ahistorical

what amazes me is that someone who admits she was ignorant about hemp thinks she has any authority to make any claim one way or another.

[Tsiyu]

174. My sentiments exactly

The soldiers and supporters of the War on a Plant use the same tactics the Rightwing uses to smear Democrats:

Demonize

Insult

Lie

Refuse to address (or even just take a moment to learn) the history of a matter.

It's been muy effective, I'll give them that. Effective at sucking up $$$$$$, destroying futures and adding to people's suffering.

AND effective at making this NOT the "land of the free" unless you have health insurance or like to get drunk. Then - have all the mind-altering substances you can afford. Go you!

Thanks for all your work and research on this topic RainDog.

[RainDog]

169. it's not my attempt

what I was trying to explain is that you're stupid if you think Washington held the same view about cannabis plants as you do.

But you can also simply look at the probability of something. We already know that attitudes toward such things were not the same as they are today. People could pay their taxes with hemp. Hemp was considered essential to survival for the colonies. They loved hemp.

It's only been within the last decades, over the entire history of this nation, that people thought cannabis was anything other than one of the most useful plants in existence.

That you think it's such a stretch to think Washington could have used cannabis is really an indication of close-minded ignorance - that's all.

If the only reason for Washington to separate female plants was because of use as something smoked or eaten or suspended in liquid to use as medicine, then I can certainly accept that he might have used cannabis.

You know, back in those days, Americans drank more liquor than anything else. It was perfectly normal and the amts of alcohol consumed would astonish people today. For me to acknowledge this doesn't mean I am saying it was a good or bad thing - it just means it's part of history. Hemp is also part of America's history - a big part. Independence from the British depended upon America growing its own hemp. Americans also grew and consumed tobacco - see, none of these things are modern inventions.

Cannabis has been used as medicine for 5000 years, first mentioned by the Chinese. It was also mentioned by the Greeks. The founders who were educated all read Greek and Latin. Washington had actors perform Roman plays for the troops.

Herodutus, considered the "first historian" wrote about the use of cannabis that's burned and inhaled to induce euphoria in the 400s, bce. The use of cannabis was mentioned to treat depression in Anatomy of Melancholy, a FAMOUS BOOK - still in print, btw - by the British clergyman, Robert Burton, in the 1600s. The New English Dispensatory, in 1764, recommended hemp roots for medicine, and The Edinburgh New Dispensary, in 1794, listed hemp as the cure for various ailments. The slaves that worked Washington's farm came from Africa, where cannabis was used as medicine and for intoxication in rituals as well.

Jan van Riebeeck was the first governor of the Dutch colony at the Cape of Good Hope. In 1658, he described the Hottentot's use of cannabis. They called it Dagga. They didn't smoke it until later, another 50 years or so, but still before Washington's time, but they ingested it to use as an intoxicant . And, of course, the Dutch were the original colonists in the New York area.

Anyway, since you didn't even know about hemp, maybe you should reserve judgement until you know something about a topic.

[xiamiam]

193. bullseye

"Only straight, drinking, white, middle class conservative Dems can carry the party all by themselves"

That is a great line..and ridiculous truth, unfortunately. I love that you got to the heart of it..they might all not be men..but they definitely think they know whats best for everyone ..whether they understand the issue or not..controlling democrats in a democracy..might as well herd cats.

[Tsiyu]

203. Was it WC Fields who said

"I would never belong to an organization that would have me as a member" ?

Or Will Rogers: "I'm not a member of any organized political party. I'm a Democrat." Something like that

Thank you for your kind words.

I've seen how that narrow-minded strategy of shunning works in TN. The TN Democratic party - outside of the bigger cities - seems to only want white people between the ages of 45 and 80, who are hyper conservative and mainline Christian so they don't offend people who are never going to be part of the party anyway.

You can volunteer but they'll never call you back to do anything if they even sniff a whiff of teh hippy or teh gay or if they see a piercing or tattoo. And then they wonder why they can't get a win in this state.

[progressoid]

159. Huh. This thread seems to have brought out some intense feelings.

Go figure.

[pscot]

163. There are a lot of good Democrats who are POed about this

And the pushback seems fairly obtuse. Living with chronic pain gives you a different perspective.

[progressoid]

166. I'm one of those POed Democrats.

Honestly, I thought we would have resolved this problem years ago. Frankly, it's sickening how our side is acting about this.

But I noticed the usual apologists showed up to educate us on the truth.

[loudsue]

160. The bush drug cartel is probably behind threats.

I'd bet money.

[ProSense]

170. Here:

Thank Nixon and Reagan for the war on drugs
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002652473

[Tsiyu]

176. Well By Golly I have seen the light

Since anything Nixon or Reagan did is written in stone, there is absolutely nothing Obama can do to change anything.

Forget the entire thread, then.

(You know, it used to be women couldn't vote. It's a good thing the suffragettes didn't
spend all their time blaming Adams and Madison but worked to change the laws with the politicians of THEIR day. That tactic has gone out of style, I see.)

[ProSense]

180. You misunderstood

"Since anything Nixon or Reagan did is written in stone, there is absolutely nothing Obama can do to change anything."

President Obama can do a lot. Still, doesn't change the Nixon or Reagan legacies that brought us to this point.

FYI.

[Tsiyu]

181. For your edification

Nixon and Reagan aside, the War on a Plant has been waged by industrial competitors:

http://www.botgard.ucla.edu/html/botanytextbooks/economicbotany/Cannabis/index.html

(emphasis mine)

Marijuana was intentionally introduced to North America in Jamestown (1611) as a fiber plant, used primarily for ropes and canvas sails and for paper to print Bibles (the Gutenberg Bible and many others were published on hemp paper; what would Rev. Falwell say about marijuana Bibles?), and in many states marijuana occasionally grows as a weed, spread by birds. Many famous documents, including early drafts of the Declaration of Independence and writings of Thomas Paine, were scribed on cannabis paper. Hemp farming was done by Thomas Jefferson and many other famous individuals of colonial times, our domestic hemp industry helped our ancestors become economically independent of Mother England, and hemp was at the center of debate between the North and the South in fights by Webster and Clay over tariffs. Regardless of that legacy, in the United States the first marijuana laws were enacted in 1900, presumably because the liquor lobby did not want competition, even though from 1840-1900 more than 100 papers had been published in Western medical literature for using marijuana to treat various illnesses and discomforts. The League of Nations opposed the drug in 1925. The great blow to U.S. use of marijuana as a medicine came with the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, which became law following a massive campaign by Harry Anslinger, head of the Federal Bureau of Narcotics, who accused marijuana to be an addictive drug, causing violent crimes, psychosis, and mental deterioration. The film Reefer Madness was part of that campaign. That law levied a tax of $1 per ounce for industrial or medical purposes and $100 per ounce for other uses, and tax evasion was punishable by stiff fines or prison terms. That legislation made marijuana a major financial liability for anyone dealing with the plant, and all legitimate uses of marijuana and hemp were essentially stopped economically.

Several books have chronicled the legal and political actions that followed passage of the 1937 law against the use of marijuana. Early on Major LaGuardia of New York City established a commission of physicians to investigate claims made by Anslinger against marijuana; in 1944, that commission published its findings that there is no proof of links between marijuana and crime, antisocial behavior, sexual overstimulation, etc., but the U.S.F.B.N. denounced that report. The U.S. government staunchly defended its policy while later secretly giving contracts to companies to identify military uses of cannabis. In 1970, under President Nixon the Congress passed the Controlled Substances Act, which assigned psychoactive drugs to five schedules, and cannabis was assigned to the most restrictive one, Schedule I, meaning that it has no medical use, a high potential for abuse, and cannot be used safely even under doctor's supervision. Remarkably, drugs like cocaine and many opiates were placed on schedules with less restrictions, even though many of those are both deadly and highly addictive. Beginning in 1972, legal challenges began against the 1970 Controlled Substances Act, basically to reclassify Cannabis as a Schedule II drug, so that marijuana could be used for some medical uses. To date, the U.S. government through its agencies has blocked and avoided hearings and sidestepped judgments favoring the reclassification of marijuana, while many states, beginning in 1978 with New Mexico, have attempted to decriminalize possession for medical or personal use.

The one window of opportunity has been a legislated program whereby individuals could apply for medical use, a permission called Compassionate IND, Investigation New Drug, so that a person, through a physician would be allowed to petition the government for variance. The first person to receive a Compassionate IND was Robert Randall (1976), a glaucoma victim. The paperwork to accomplish that was loaded on the physician, the pharmacy, and so forth, and the standard so high that until 1989 only seven had been granted. In 1992, only 12 CINDs had been activated in the United States, and the thousands of frustrated applicants turned instead to illegal procurement rather than fight the battle of swimming upstream against government and public who want the program suspended because it would presumably undercut programs to stop illegal drugs. Passage of California Prop 215 in November 1996 (and another in Arizona) was an attempt to give power to physicians to approve cannabis for medical use, and, of course, the federal government threatened physicians with criminal penalties and loss of a license to practice medicine if they participated in the movement, in violation of federal anti-drug laws.

The medical use of smoked marijuana and orally taken THC or other cannabinoids must be accepted by the United States on its merits. Toward this goal, there is mounting evidence that, for a portion of victims of horrible diseases and pain, smoked marijuana helps alleviate symptoms, reduces or eliminates side effects of traditional medications, permits reduction in dosage of other medications, or even retards the progress of the disease, all this at a fraction of the cost for contemporary methods.

Nixon escalated the War on a Plant, but he by no means was the first to propagandize against it for his own purposes (and that of his buddies.)

http://www.ukcia.org/medical/medicinaluseofmarijuana.php

The history of marijuana's medicinal use was traced by Mikuriya (1973). The earliest records of medicinal marijuana use have been traced back to China in 2737 BC, and evidence of its therapeutic use can be found throughout world cultures. It was used in colonial America and listed in the U.S. Pharmacopoeia, as tincture of cannabis, until 1941. In the 19th century, William B. O'Shaughnessy, MD, studied marijuana and concluded that it was safe and effective in the treatment of various maladies. The first extensive U.S. study, conducted by the Ohio State Medical Society in 1860, had similar conclusions.

More recently, in 1980, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academy of Sciences, at the request of the U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and the director of the National Institutes of Health, agreed to conduct a review and analysis of health-related effects of marijuana. IOM's findings recognized marijuana's therapeutic potential in decreasing the intraocular pressure for glaucoma patients, controlling the severe nausea and vomiting associated with chemotherapy, acting as an anticonvulsant, relaxing muscles and thus counteracting spasticity problems, and other uses. The IOM investigators highly recommended further research to determine the full therapeutic potential of this drug. This study also noted that marijuana seems to work differently than other conventional medicines (Institute of Medicine, 1982). The government's response was to print only 300 copies of this study -- not even enough for each member of Congress


snip

Under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, marijuana is a Schedule I controlled drug. This status prohibits its use by anyone and prohibits physicians from prescribing it for patients. Until February 1992, there was a little-known loophole that allowed a handful of patients legal access to this medicine: the Investigational New Drug (IND) Program administered by the Food and Drug Administration. Unfortunately, in February 1992, U.S. Secretary of Health & Human Services Louis Sullivan, MD, closed this access to all new applicants, as well as to more than 30 patients who had been approved for having access to this medicine but had not yet received their supply. Only 10 patients who had been approved and already were receiving their medicine have been allowed continued legal access to this drug.

Various theories attempt to rationalize the government's prohibition of this drug/plant: As an efficient fuel, it presented competition to the oil industry. As a durable natural fiber, it presented competition to the synthetic fiber industry; in fact, Levi's jeans originally were made of hemp. "Reefer madness" hysteria was created in the 1930s by Harry Anslinger of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, which eventually evolved into the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). Use of the Mexican name of the cannabis plant, marijuana, was popularized by the Hearst newspaper chain to scare the public into believing that there was a new and dangerous drug being introduced to American youth by black musicians and Mexicans. The act of bigotry insinuated that the use of this drug would lead to insanity or acts of violence such as rape or murder. The result of this media blitz was the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, which marked the beginning of marijuana's prohibition (Herer, 1991).

Big Industry hates hemp and cannabis, and hated it long before Nixon or Reagan entered the picture. These two merely did their bidding........... As Obama is doing today.

[Webster Green]

182. Nice post!

Excellent concise little history lesson there.

Dr. Todd Mikuriya was a friend of mine. What a great researcher and advocate for cannabis he was. He often came to listen to our pro-pot ska band 'Net Weight', when we played Berkeley in the early '90s. RIP Dr. Todd!

[Tsiyu]

183. Thanks WG

You run in great company lol


And i'm just glad my 'puter decided to let me open the links.

[ProSense]

186. It was definitely

interesting, especially this part:

Under the Controlled Substances Act of 1970, marijuana is a Schedule I controlled drug. This status prohibits its use by anyone and prohibits physicians from prescribing it for patients. Until February 1992, there was a little-known loophole that allowed a handful of patients legal access to this medicine: the Investigational New Drug (IND) Program administered by the Food and Drug Administration. Unfortunately, in February 1992, U.S. Secretary of Health & Human Services Louis Sullivan, MD, closed this access to all new applicants, as well as to more than 30 patients who had been approved for having access to this medicine but had not yet received their supply. Only 10 patients who had been approved and already were receiving their medicine have been allowed continued legal access to this drug.

Various theories attempt to rationalize the government's prohibition of this drug/plant: As an efficient fuel, it presented competition to the oil industry. As a durable natural fiber, it presented competition to the synthetic fiber industry; in fact, Levi's jeans originally were made of hemp. "Reefer madness" hysteria was created in the 1930s by Harry Anslinger of the Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs, which eventually evolved into the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA). Use of the Mexican name of the cannabis plant, marijuana, was popularized by the Hearst newspaper chain to scare the public into believing that there was a new and dangerous drug being introduced to American youth by black musicians and Mexicans. The act of bigotry insinuated that the use of this drug would lead to insanity or acts of violence such as rape or murder. The result of this media blitz was the passage of the Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, which marked the beginning of marijuana's prohibition (Herer, 1991).

Looks like Bush Sr's administration had a hand in making access to medical marijuana much harder.

[Webster Green]

188. They've all had a hand in it, of course.

But Obama could ease up on the escalation against medicinal use. He could kick us down a little hope & change. Throw us a friggin' bone.

See my post #187.

[ProSense]

184. Well

Big Industry hates hemp and cannabis, and hated it long before Nixon or Reagan entered the picture. These two merely did their bidding........... As Obama is doing today.

...I'll remember to leave Nixon and Reagan alone, and blame the war on drugs on "Big Industry."

I find it extremely funny that you're deflecting blame for the federal policy, the war on drugs, launched and escalated by two Republican Presidents, respectively, when it's pointed out in a thread calling out the current President as the most "hostile" in "U.S. history."

[Webster Green]

187. You know what is really frustrating, ProSense?

Obama could change things up so easily. He's so cool...so good with words. I can see it all now. Obama saying something like: "C'mon, let's get real here. You all know someone who has used it to combat chemo nausea, or you know someone who knows someone. It's a no brainer. We need to re-schedule cannabis, so it can be used for treatments". That would be the right thing to do, and wouldn't require a lot of political bravery, IMO.

This is no longer a big political "hot-button". The US is ready for it. Witness all the states who have voted for medicinal cannabis. The times they are a changin'. The prez......not so much.

[RainDog]

190. agreed.

the polls tell the story about this issue for the American people. Those polls are the result of people who have worked with state legislatures to change laws because, as Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis noted, "States are the incubators for democracy."

Democracy has spoken about this issue through the avenue that is available to citizens: the vote.

The success of the legalization movement is pretty amazing when you consider the huge obstacles and the reality that a minority of states allow initiatives on their ballots.

In spite of political attempts to thwart the will of the people at the state level, citizens have continued to insist that their vote should be honored. In Arizona, citizens had to vote for legal medical marijuana THREE TIMES - and they did. Legislators have still tried to block implementation of law, rather than LOOK AT WHY THEY ARE OPPOSED.

When Americans have had access to factual information, rather than propaganda, they have chosen to legalize medical marijuana. Yet we pay the salary of an entire bureaucracy (The "Drug Czar" and his minions) to lie to the American people - that one particular agency is a spectacular failure. Yet it continues. The inertia among the beltway political class is really astounding.

So is the bias.

[Tsiyu]

189. Are you saying that Big Industry didn't (and doesn't still) influence the War on Drugs?

And are you claiming Obama isn't doing their bidding?

Now THAT would be funny.

I don't know how old you are, but I was coming of age as the War on Drugs began, and I can promise you that cops pretty much left us alone. I didn't smoke cigarettes or drink very much back then, but did occasionally ingest weed.

The cops very rarely arrested anyone. As a matter of fact, I can't think of even one friend out of many who smoked who was ever incarcerated or even arrested for cannabis possession back then.

Today, with drug forteiture laws, the same cannot be said. I know people who have been made felons for small amounts of weed. There has been an escalation since mandatory minimums have been put into place. Now, this did not start with Obama, but he has continued to let the DEA extort billions from citizens and the treasury waging this insane War on a Plant.

Nevertheless, as to your point above, a third of the states had not passed laws legalizing medical cannabis during Nixon or Reagan's years in power, so in that historical context, yes, Obama is more hardline than any modern president when it comes to harrassing dispensaries.

His justice department is wasting resources, scaring sick people and making Obama look like an ass who doesn't keep his promises.


I wish it weren't so. Much more than you do at this moment. Believe that.

[ProSense]

195. All the

The cops very rarely arrested anyone. As a matter of fact, I can't think of even one friend out of many who smoked who was ever incarcerated or even arrested for cannabis possession back then.

Today, with drug forteiture laws, the same cannot be said. I know people who have been made felons for small amounts of weed. There has been an escalation since mandatory minimums have been put into place. Now, this did not start with Obama, but he has continued to let the DEA extort billions from citizens and the treasury waging this insane War on a Plant.

Nevertheless, as to your point above, a third of the states had not passed laws legalizing medical cannabis during Nixon or Reagan's years in power, so in that historical context, yes, Obama is more hardline than any modern president when it comes to harrassing dispensaries.

...excuses, and I still say bullshit: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=651979

[provis99]

178. yet Obama probably smoked more pot than any president in history.

All Presidents, Democratic and Republican, love the "do as I say, not as I do" philosophy of behavior.

[donheld]

192. I thought this kind of truth telling were no longer allowed at DU

[xiamiam]

194. lets hope not

i read the post from skinner..and i'm not sure if we are just supposed to zip our lips about anything? everything?..i've been here for elections before but i've never been divided..we were always one team..and still are..there are issues with which many of us disagree..that doesn't make me or anyone else not a democrat..i've been a democrat for 4 decades..why would i stop disagreeing with policy because there is an election in place? are we supposed to just zip it? seems un american and i dont think thats the case.

[kenny blankenship]

198. Any day now.

We await the truth prohibition directive from on high, in the certain knowledge of our banishment.

[Major Hogwash]

200. Well, don . . .

The easiest way to tell if something is true or not at the DU is to count how many times the same 3 people post in the thread, divide by 3, and multiple by 0.

Because that is what threads like this are worth -- nothing!

[Tsiyu]

205. Well you certainly live up to your moniker

Multiple people have posted repeatedly on all sides of this issue. See, Hogwash, that's called a "discussion."

And this here is a "discussion board." Where people show up to give their opinions and debate serious stuff and not-so-serious stuff.

If discussions are worth nothing to you, why did YOU post in the thread? At least twice?

I await your no doubt very meaningful and worthy and truthy response

[donheld]

206. I was taking Skinner at his word

[RainDog]

201. One out of every ten Americans consumed cannabis last year

According to the National Survey on Drug Use. In spite of its current legal status. If they would break down the numbers differently, I am sure the figures for adults would be larger than they are - but they sort people starting at age 12. The majority of people use cannabis for the first time between ages 18-25.

Does our govt really want to claim that one out of every ten of these Americans is a criminal worthy of arrest, prosecution and jail?

I guess that's one way to create jobs - a massive prison industry. Oh wait - we ALREADY imprison more people than China.

WTG, conservatives!

[eridani]

207. Whether the chicken crossed the road or the road moved beneath the chicken

--depends upon your frame of reference--Albert Einstein. It it Obama moving rightward, or is the general population moving leftward?

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2011/10/17/346095/support-marijuana-historical-high/



At any rate, I agree that Obama ought to catch up with public opinion.

[RainDog]

227. Three things have changed since the 1990s

The first one: internet access has grown from smaller groups of early users on text-based forums to huge numbers of people with access to graphical interfaces. The internet revolution in information has extended to this topic. People talk about something that they may not have discussed otherwise. People have access to data that is not filtered by the govt and its media arms.

Two: California enacted its medical marijuana law in 1996. The sky did not fall. People learned about medical benefits.

Three: Older Americans who had no experience with marijuana died off. As the boomers move into retirement age, we see more people among that demographic who are supportive of legalization - and these same people have also found there are medical benefits for them with the use of marijuana for diseases and conditions that often come with age.

None of these conditions are going to change back to what they were prior to the 1990s. I expect support for legalization will continue to grow until it stabilizes at around 30-40% against and 70-60% for legalization - we have a consistent 30% of the population that is simply bone dead stupid about just about every issue.

[tru]

209. states' rights

From time to time it's occurred to me that we'd be better off if the North had lost the Civil War.

Slavery would have taken longer to go away, but half the U.S. would not be powerful enough to trash various nations (and itself in the process) with stupid wars.

States could enact medical marijuana laws, gay marriage, etc. People in the United States of Jesus who don't like those things could move to the United States of Rational People to get their rights.

[frylock]

214. these types of threads are honeypots for my ignore list..

someone that would dismiss these concerns with a lol, haha, or roffle smiley is someone whose opinions i couldn't give two shits about.

[RainDog]

226. in general...

“If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers.” -- Thomas Pynchon

[Rex]

218. That is actually not possible.

Since SOME POTUS along the line decided to make MJ illegal in the first place and then make it a social pariah. All that came long before Obama was born!

They can say he is the second worst, but someone else has to be the worst for starting all this bullshit.