HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Obama Announces He WON'T ...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:01 AM

Obama Announces He WON'T Prosecute POT SMOKERS in Washington and Colorado





Season's Greetings!!




In an interview with ABC News, President Obama stated that his administration won’t prosecute marijuana users in Washington, Colorado, or other states where recreational use is legal. The president told Barbara Walters, “We’ve got bigger fish to fry. It would not make sense for us to see a top priority as going after recreational users in states that have determined that it’s legal.” Obama said that he does not support legalization, “at this point,” but he noted that public opinion is shifting on the issue.
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/OTUS/president-obama-marijuana-users-high-priority-drug-war/story?id=17946783#.UMs926VPqkT



President Obama said, “This is a tough problem, because Congress has not yet changed the law. I head up the executive branch; we’re supposed to be carrying out laws. And so what we’re going to need to have is a conversation about, How do you reconcile a federal law that still says marijuana is a federal offense and state laws that say that it’s legal?”



Obama’s answer to his own question appears to be something that Republicans preach, but rarely practice. It is a concept that is foreign to current the Republican Party. He is respecting the will of the voters. Barack Obama is demonstrating a greater advocacy for states’ rights than the Republicans who supposedly champion them.



In the same way that Republicans are ignoring the will of a majority of voters on raising taxes on the wealthy and tackling the deficit with a balanced approach, they are also many of the same people who are wringing their hands and dying to prosecute legal marijuana users. The country is seeing the same kind of public opinion shift on marijuana legalization that is also occurring on same sex marriage.




cont'

http://www.politicususa.com/obama-announces-prosecute-pot-smokers-washington-colorado.html

79 replies, 4706 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 79 replies Author Time Post
Reply Obama Announces He WON'T Prosecute POT SMOKERS in Washington and Colorado (Original post)
Segami Dec 2012 OP
RomneyLies Dec 2012 #1
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #26
Bennyboy Dec 2012 #37
BlueCaliDem Dec 2012 #46
ProSense Dec 2012 #2
frazzled Dec 2012 #3
Segami Dec 2012 #6
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #77
frylock Dec 2012 #24
Shampoobra Dec 2012 #31
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #4
RZM Dec 2012 #7
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #18
frylock Dec 2012 #25
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #27
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #28
frylock Dec 2012 #56
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #67
frylock Dec 2012 #68
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #69
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #64
marsis Dec 2012 #36
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #41
SomethingFishy Dec 2012 #47
marsis Dec 2012 #17
OldDem2012 Dec 2012 #21
on point Dec 2012 #34
Bennyboy Dec 2012 #39
shanti Dec 2012 #44
jwirr Dec 2012 #5
Kber Dec 2012 #8
jwirr Dec 2012 #11
DefenseLawyer Dec 2012 #12
Le Taz Hot Dec 2012 #13
Le Taz Hot Dec 2012 #9
datasuspect Dec 2012 #10
liberal_at_heart Dec 2012 #14
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #29
green for victory Dec 2012 #38
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #43
green for victory Dec 2012 #48
1StrongBlackMan Dec 2012 #57
slampoet Dec 2012 #15
RoccoR5955 Dec 2012 #16
tavalon Dec 2012 #19
Dustlawyer Dec 2012 #20
rhett o rick Dec 2012 #22
frylock Dec 2012 #23
DevonRex Dec 2012 #30
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #32
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #33
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #35
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #60
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #61
grahamhgreen Dec 2012 #62
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #63
Comrade Grumpy Dec 2012 #50
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #58
limpyhobbler Dec 2012 #40
glowing Dec 2012 #42
green for victory Dec 2012 #45
glowing Dec 2012 #73
green for victory Dec 2012 #75
Comrade Grumpy Dec 2012 #49
mike_c Dec 2012 #51
aquart Dec 2012 #52
Canuckistanian Dec 2012 #71
Politicalboi Dec 2012 #53
Democracyinkind Dec 2012 #54
bluestateguy Dec 2012 #55
Liberal_Stalwart71 Dec 2012 #59
maveric56 Dec 2012 #65
klyon Dec 2012 #66
Floyd_Gondolli Dec 2012 #70
nolabear Dec 2012 #72
green for victory Dec 2012 #74
nolabear Dec 2012 #78
RKP5637 Dec 2012 #76
Honeycombe8 Dec 2012 #79

Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:06 AM

1. Right answer, Mr. President.

 

Right answer.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:29 PM

26. Yup! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #1)


Response to RomneyLies (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:25 PM

46. I never had any doubt this would ultimately be his answer.

I trust this president, and despite the frenzy and fearmongering permeating the MJ using American public around here, terrified that the president was "reviewing legal recourse" regarding Washington and Colorado, I knew he was merely double-checking what he could circumvent, just like he did with refusing to go after the children of undocumented immigrants.

I've even predicted as much, despite a lot of criticism here, that this would be his course of action.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:07 AM

2. Cool! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:12 AM

3. Did anyone ever think they would?

Seriously, you've got to have a case of the paranoids to think the Feds are going to bust into your basement rec room to confiscate your bag of weed and put you in federal prison. This was always about executing federal law to go after big time dealers and growers, especially when either money laundering or guns are involved.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:25 AM

6. I think President Obama's statement serves to publicly reassure citizen concerns

that the Feds won't move to bust users.

If anything, just like Don't Ask, Don't Tell,....this could be a WH trial balloon testing the national tolerance.

The cracks are showing and time and effort will also bring this wall down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Reply #6)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:21 PM

77. Yep! That's what I think too. "The cracks are showing and time and effort will

also bring this wall down."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:22 PM

24. especially when either money laundering or guns are involved..

yeh, see HSBC for example.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frazzled (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:50 PM

31. No, but there existed a real possibility of the Feds creating a test case

Washington state has until December 2013 to have the whole growing and distribution network in place.

Once the stores are open for business, all the Feds would have to do is arrest one buyer as he or she leaves the store, and when the defendant argues the legality of the product in court, the Feds could try to have the whole state initiative struck down as a violation of Federal law.

It would have been the simplest and cheapest way for the Feds to kill Initiative 502, and Obama's statement indicates they won't be taking that option.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:12 AM

4. Hopefully other DU posters will read this and quit slamming the President on this issue. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:32 AM

7. All politicians should be pushed on this. Especially the president

 

That being said . . .

This is a positive step for sure. It's not a huge step, but it's definitely in the right direction. And that's something to be commended.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RZM (Reply #7)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:58 AM

18. You do understand that certain GOP Members of Congress are just waiting for the President....

....to do something they can use to impeach him don't you? He has to be very careful in terms of what he says publicly on any legal issue, especially if he says anything contrary to current Federal law.

We can push politicians on this or any other issue, but we have to understand that the President has limits to what he can say or do publicly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #18)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:24 PM

25. the republican congress is hovering above a single-digit approval rating..

stop being afraid of what they're going to do ffs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #25)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:33 PM

27. One discounts one's opponent ...

at great peril. Politics is still politics.

No need to GIVE the gop a stick to hit himself with ... especially, with the fickle state of the public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #25)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:35 PM

28. I'm personally not afraid of anything anyone can do....

...but the President has to operate within certain parameters, whether you like it or not.

As far as the "Republican congress hovering above a single-digit approval rating", so what? That hasn't had any impact on how they've conducted themselves so far, has it? Do you really think that would stop them from attempting to impeach the President if they had a chance to do so?

Ffs, indeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #28)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:57 PM

56. clinton was impeached and how did that affect you or me?

it didn't. let them hold impeachment hearings because Obama rescheduled MJ, and just sit back and watch the demise of the republican party.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #56)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 07:46 PM

67. But the Senate didn't convict him. Can we count on that this time? I'm not willing to bet on it. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #67)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 09:45 PM

68. the DEMOCRATICALLY controlled senate? gee, i don't know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #68)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:34 PM

69. Not all of the Senate Democrats are real Democrats...you should know that by now. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #25)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:43 PM

64. They don't care about approval rating. Redistricting made it so that they're in safe districts.

That's why they keep pushing these wingnut policies despite what the public wants. As long as they are in safe districts, they are free to push their 'bagger agenda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #18)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:00 PM

36. Sorry but I have to call

 

BS on your post. That's one of the problems with this guy, he's so afraid of the right. It's long passed time for this President to "man-up and do something right in the "War on America".
If he only had the fortitude of GWB.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marsis (Reply #36)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:08 PM

41. Thanks for your obvious CONCERN. Duly noted. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #18)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:27 PM

47. Disagree.. Republicans are the "states rights" party so they say

They are in a corner at this point. They can't go against states rights so they have to leave the Marijuana issue behind. Obama has taken a baby step. Once we start bringing in revenue in Co and Wa the feds will have to seriously reconsider their position if they want to continue to be serious about "fixing the debt".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:55 AM

17. Time to end the war on Americans.

 

He's ended or ending two other wars. He's been far worse than "W" in this arena. If Americans want to use it what's the frigging problem besides BIG money? Oh wait.......................

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marsis (Reply #17)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:38 AM

21. "He's been far worse than "W" in this arena"?? Read my response #18. nt.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:56 PM

34. Only when calls off Holder in CA and dismisses all the cases they created over last few years

And BTW, much better to just go full bore legalize, save the billions in the stupid drug war and release all those people from long prison sentences and save some more billions on the prison system.

Only then should people relent on the president for this issue.

And why doesn't he lead and instead always needs to be dragged to the correct decision??

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #4)


Response to OldDem2012 (Reply #4)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:21 PM

44. we'll quit slamming him on this

when he quits attacking california's medical marijuana programs!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:19 AM

5. In the meantime it would help if he use his DEA for some of the real problem drugs. And he could

have Holder change the status of marijuana from schedule 1 to 2 to show that he understands reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jwirr (Reply #5)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:34 AM

8. Can the DEA change the status of a drug without congress?

Asking out of genuine ignornance on my part. I thought the schedules were set by congress, but admit I'm no expert on the subject.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kber (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:44 AM

11. No, but Ezra Klein did a segment on Rachel that said Holder can.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kber (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:46 AM

12. It can be rescheduled by the Justice Department/DEA at any time. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kber (Reply #8)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:51 AM

13. It can be rescheduled by Obama

as it was Nixon who assigned the Schedule I in the first place (after talking Congress into passing a law allowing the president to assign scheduling). What the president can assign, another president COULD unassiagn -- if he really wanted to. I wouldn't hold my breath.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:36 AM

9. This discussion has been going on

for several hours now in LBN:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014335989

Some REALLY good responses and, to the poster above, yes, the President IS criticized (clutch the pearls!)

LTH

P.S. Not a slam to the OP but the one in LBN has sort of a kick-start in the responses category.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:40 AM

10. good job Mr. President

 

toke it up!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:52 AM

14. then he needs to sit Eric Holder down and have a chat with him

because Holder has been tough on medical dispensaries even though medical marijuana is legal in several states. Just because Obama says he doesn't want to go after anybody doesn't mean the DOJ won't go after them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to liberal_at_heart (Reply #14)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:36 PM

29. I suspect he has ...

When was the last bust of a legitimate MM Dispensary?

I don't believe there is one coming in the near future either.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #29)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:04 PM

38. Harborside Health Center may not be the last...

 

but it might be the biggest

"Oakland's latest round in its campaign to save the nation's largest medical marijuana dispensary includes a statement this week from Mayor Jean Quan saying federal prosecutors should back off, and the federal government's own patent application lauding the therapeutic qualities of cannabis.

...U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag filed suit in July seeking the closure of Harborside and the forfeiture of its offices at 1840 Embarcadero. She said the dispensary, which supplies marijuana to 108,000 patients, is violating federal drug laws.

On Dec. 20, U.S. Magistrate Maria Elena James is scheduled to consider a request by the building's owner, Ana Chretien, to shut down the dispensary and Oakland's request to put Chretien's motion on hold until James rules on the city's challenge to the government's suit. Oakland claims the federal statute of limitations required the government to seek forfeiture no later than 2011, five years after Harborside opened.

http://www.sfgate.com/default/article/Oakland-cites-surprise-medical-pot-backer-4113767.php


Over the past year, Haag and California's three other federal prosecutors have brought similar actions against landlords throughout the state that lease space to dispensaries, most of which have been evicted or closed on their own.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/11/harborside-health-center-lawsuit_n_1956670.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to green for victory (Reply #38)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:18 PM

43. It would not surprise me ...

if the litigation was abandoned.

Or alternatively (and with a better strategic result), have the case continue which, with President Obama's statement, would allow Harborside a 14th Amendment argument.

This approach would be far more certain, and far less politically risky, than the DoJ changing the Schedule or waiting on Congress to act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 1StrongBlackMan (Reply #43)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:31 PM

48. If you think that case is going to be abandoned-

 

with all due respect, perhaps you haven't been paying attention

But hopefully I'm wrong and you are right, and in the next few days the Feds will drop the case. Dec. 20 is close!

On Dec. 20, U.S. Magistrate Maria Elena James is scheduled to consider a request by the building's owner, Ana Chretien, to shut down the dispensary and Oakland's request to put Chretien's motion on hold until James rules on the city's challenge to the government's suit.


If I had an extra dollar to my name, I'd offer to bet. But I don't.
Good luck!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to green for victory (Reply #48)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:57 PM

57. I have been party to cases ...

dropped the day of the Hearing.

But that said, did you pay attention to the second part of my post? I've been party to that too ... where we proceeded with the litigation knowing we would lose; and thereby, cementing the policy change, that was politically risky.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:52 AM

15. Then maybe he should tell the city of Grand Rapids to stop dragging their feet.

They've increased K9 patrols of random pedestrians and are stalling this in the courts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 10:52 AM

16. Nah... He'll just use his agents

to take your weed, and use it themselves!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:04 AM

19. I hope he communicated this to Mr. Holder

Seems they have been pretty feisty in the recent past about medical marijuana so I would think recreational would be just one more jab at the puritan ethic at the DOJ's office.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 11:04 AM

20. I know someone who became a licensed grower in California. He spent a lot of money

to go into business, and just before harvest, Obama went back on his word. They could not find a dispensary for their crop. It was timed to screw the industry the most, even though Obama had said he would not enforce the Fed laws. What was up with that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:16 PM

22. That's a great start. But please follow through and tell Holder

to take specific actions to not prosecute smokers, growers and sellers, esp medical marijuana dispensaries.

Specific actions would likely include moving or transferring personnel that now have the job to bust and prosecute growers and sellers.

If the President doesnt follow thru, tell him Barbara Walters will be real mad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:21 PM

23. no but they'll prosecute growers and sellers..

so good luck finding any.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to frylock (Reply #23)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:40 PM

30. I've never had a problem here in Colorado

under MMJ.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:51 PM

32. Not surprisingly, liberals are STILL angry with the president...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:54 PM

33. But at least they won't jump ship, and be usurped by Libertarian Republicans!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #33)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 12:58 PM

35. They may not jump ship, but their constant whining may demoralize voters. It's 2010 all over again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #35)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:12 PM

60. Disagree. Voters are excited to get to the poles and vote for decriminalization!

And while they're at it, they vote Dem!

We can sweep in 2014 if we push progressive policies.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #60)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:15 PM

61. I hope you're right. We all know that midterms can be tricky because turnout tends to be down.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #61)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:35 PM

62. "Colorado Democratic Party Platform Supports Marijuana Legalization Initiative"

"At their state convention the Democratic Party of Colorado included marijuana legalization as part of their new party platform. The platform supports Amendment 64, an initiative already on the ballot that would legalize, tax and regulate marijuana for the use by adults over the age of 21. The support of one of the state’s two major political parties should be an important boost to the campaign as it works to build support among voters before November.

The Colorado Democratic Party’s platforms includes: 17. Regulate and tax marijuana in a manner similar to alcohol, limiting its use to those 21 and older. We support Amendment 64, the Initiative to regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol.

While the party at its state convention approved a new platform that supports Amendment 64, the party spokesman wants to point out that it has not formally “endorsed” the amendment. Technically, only the party’s central committee can offer formal endorsements of amendments or candidates on behalf of the state party.

The Democratic Party of Colorado is simply reflecting the views and wishes of its base with this move. A PPP poll from December found that 64% of Democrats in Colorado think the use of marijuana should be legal, while only 26% of Democrats think it should be illegal. Nationally, a Gallup poll from last year found that 57% of Democrats nationwide believe the use of marijuana should be legal.

Having the support of a major party for an active campaign to legalize marijuana is more proof that the issue has gone mainstream. As more politicians and local political parties come out in support of the idea, it becomes easier and easier for other elected officials and groups to follow suit."

http://justsaynow.firedoglake.com/2012/04/16/colorado-democratic-party-supports-marijuana-legalization-initiative/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to grahamhgreen (Reply #62)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:40 PM

63. Support is high at the national level and that's great news. I don't live in CO, but I do live in MD

which is a fairly progressive state. I'm sure that there will be some push here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal_Stalwart71 (Reply #32)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:41 PM

50. Not angry, but not overly impressed. He merely acknowledges reality:

The feds don't have the resources to arrest pot smokers. State and local cops make 99% of all arrests.

He begs the question of whether his administration will allow Colorado and Washington to implement schemes to tax and regulate marijuana commerce, as per the will of the voters in those states.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #50)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:04 PM

58. Can we wait and see before we start damning the guy? If state law has been passed, let's wait and

see. You haven't even given the guy a chance.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:06 PM

40. "It would not make sense for us to see a top priority" nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:08 PM

42. He doesn't have to go after the smokers, he can aim

at those providing marijuana. A person growing marijuana will have more than 2 oz around... So, it will be a distribution issue.

When congress figures out how to write the rules so that Big Tobacco becomes the "new distributors" and figures out a way to make big pharma/ bio tech figures out how to make marijuana addictive, then it will be all set to legalize.

After all, money walks; and there are some who want in on all the profits.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glowing (Reply #42)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:25 PM

45. another avenue already persued: $

 

Try to open a bank account anywhere in the US after declaring you are a medical cannabis dispensary

And Washington State thinks the Feds are going to allow state run stores to put their money into an FDIC insured institution.

We shall see...

Oh, they've got the BigPharma thing already covered

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to green for victory (Reply #45)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 01:56 PM

73. HSBC seems to launder money for cartels, I'm sure they wouldn't mind "clean drug money"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to glowing (Reply #73)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:13 PM

75. Joe Biden

 

wouldn't like that

". Biden has sponsored more damaging drug war legislation than any Democrat in Congress. Hate the way federal prosecutors use RICO laws to take aim at drug offenders? Thank Biden. How about the abomination that is federal asset forfeiture laws? Thank Biden. Think federal prosecutors have too much power in drug cases? Thank Biden.

Think the title of a “Drug Czar” is sanctimonious and silly? Thank Biden, who helped create the position (and still considers it an accomplishment worth boasting about). Tired of the ridiculous steroids hearings in Congress? thank Biden, who led the effort to make steroids a Schedule 3 drug, and has been among the blowhardiest of the blowhards when it comes to sports and performance enhancing drugs. Biden voted in favor of using international development aid for drug control (think plan Columbia, plan Afghanistan, and other meddling anti-drug efforts that have only fostered loathing of America, backlash, and unintended consequences). Oh, and he was also the chief sponsor of 2004’s horrendous RAVE Act.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/speakeasy/2008/aug/24/joe_bidens_awful_record_drug_pol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:38 PM

49. Obama's comments beg the question of what about taxation and regulation?

That's the real issue. Of course he isn't going to go after pot smokers! The feds don't have the resources.

But will the administration allow Colorado and Washington to implement regulated marijuana commerce, as per the will of the voters?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:45 PM

51. now call off the DoJ dogs that are after LEGAL medical marijuana providers...

...in California!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:46 PM

52. Finally. Now tell Holder.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aquart (Reply #52)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:04 AM

71. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:49 PM

53. Well then,

We need to put legalization on more ballots in 2014. It's too bad we couldn't make it like a profit sharing thing for the country like oil is to Alaska. Have Cannabis Cup competitions in every state, and get imported weed too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:50 PM

54. Great move Obama!

Lol. The naivite of some - as if consumers were ever seriously targeted by the Feds...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 01:52 PM

55. The Blame Obama First crowd will ignore this and move on to their next complaint

He does something right, the Blame Obama First crowd will just pocket this, NOT say thank you and bitch about the next rumor flying around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #55)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 02:05 PM

59. Read the entire thead. They are already blaming him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:46 PM

65. Now what about California?

Holders "jack-booted thugs" raided almost ALL the med-mar stores and jailed many of the operators here in CA. One guy, that I know is still behind bars!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 04:22 PM

66. I cheer the Pres for making this decision

but he could end the war tomorrow by removing pot from the schedule and telling justice to drop all cases then release all political prisoners convicted of these bogus laws
this has gone on long enough

people in other states deserve the same treatment
equal rights for all

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:02 AM

70. Great start, but what about regulated sales?

 

Most who have followed this issue knew that it would be physically impossible to prosecute users, but businesses are another matter. Soon there will be stores in these states tht sell marijuana to those who are old enough to buy it. What the federal government does then, if anything, seems key here.

I'm beginning to believe it may be a look the other way approach for a year or two to see how it works with a possible crackdown on growers and sellers if it's a disaster. But I expect it to be fairly successful. The Colorado law is a model for future states IMO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 12:12 AM

72. I have to say it feels really funny to be here in Seattle where it's legal.

I've lived all my life with that thing hanging over my head, the little bit of pot I like like the occasional cocktail. I can walk down the street now? I can smoke at the festivals and outdoor concerts? I don't have to have that guilty feeling that my overbearing superego imposes even though I totally believe in legalizing?

It's going to be interesting getting used to this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolabear (Reply #72)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:04 PM

74. public use is illegal

 

you might find the text of the initiative interesting

http://www.sos.wa.gov/_assets/elections/initiatives/i502.pdf

and try this: Ask the yes voters you run across if they've read it

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to green for victory (Reply #74)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:23 PM

78. But the police here have said they won't bother. They're relieved to spend their time otherwise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:19 PM

76. Excellent!!! K&R !!! n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Segami (Original post)

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 02:24 PM

79. He can't prosecute anyone. He's the President, not the Attorney General. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread