From a casual reading of GD, you'd think this election was all about medical marijuana ...

[Bake]

Guess what ... IT'S NOT. Is it an important issue? Sure. Is it as important as THE ECONOMY? JOBS? Did I mention THE ECONOMY? FOREIGN POLICY?

No. It's not.

Obama may not be the friendliest president to the med mar folks, but there's a whole lot more important things going on. And those who need medical marijuana, frankly, are going to find it and use it anyway. Should they be criminals? NO. Would they be criminals under a Rmoney administration? HELL YES.

Think about that.

Bake

[Lionessa]

1. The marijuana issue though represents a lot of the same general political contradictions

evident in the Obama administration. The whole saying one thing while doing another. So no, it isn't the main or only issue, but it is a full and complete representation of the frustrations many of us that voted for Candidate Obama in 2008 are experiencing across the board re: employment/middle class, ending wars/torture/rendition, holding war criminals or financial criminals responsible, boosting health insurers instead of health care reform, and the waste and inequity of the war on drugs particularly as it relates to mmj.

[TheWraith]

43. I think it reflects a contradiction between what was said and what some people thought was said.

Such as that Obama expressing support for medical marijuana was interpreted as him saying "I'll no longer enforce federal law."

[Lionessa]

47. Wow, such spin. So you're okay with Candidate Obama parsing his words to appear to mean something

they didn't? Not me.

[whatchamacallit]

44. Yep. Well explained.

[edhopper]

3. From a casual reading of GD

you'd think many issues are more important than they are. It's called discussion. Sometimes more people have something to say about one issue than another.
I think you are over reacting.

Also "Romney would be worse" is a useless point, which should be banned from DU.

[Kind Bud]

4. Can I have some of what you're smoking?

Don't bogart the joint.

Pass it on!

[nadinbrzezinski]

5. Oh my...you think marihuana has nothing to do with foreign policy?

Oh my...narrow.

Or did you miss the whole war on drugs, which is an international failure, become part of the Bogota talks?

That be the most recent example.

I forgive you. While our media was concentrating on the security violation, adults around LatAm concentrated on that major policy issue.

[duhneece]

54. The War on Drugs, especially cannabis, contributes hugely to the murders in Mexico

And is racist in its implementation.

[Uncle Joe]

6. Medical Marijuana or for that matter the legalization of cannabis are issues that influence

much more than just those two questions.

The economy, jobs, foreign policy, the alleviation of pain and suffering increasing the quality of life for untold millions, state and federal budget deficits, governmental and police corruption, the enrichment of organized crime, the destabilization of Mexico, the exploding prison population, criminalization and disenfranchisement of the American People from participating in the political process, poverty, broken families, potential tax revenue, the erosion of civil rights and privacy.

A couple of these trees are the face of MMJ and legalization of cannabis




but the positive effects from legalization is vastly greater in scope.



Thanks for the thread, Bake.

[Bake]

9. Realistically, pot is NOT going to be legalized in the foreseeable future.

The medical marijuana issue is a much smaller subset of that larger issue.

So I still submit that it's not the major issue that some make of it in GD. And it's certainly not a reason to stay home in November or to vote for anyone other than the President.

Bake

[Uncle Joe]

15. I believe that depends on your age, if you're past 90 probably not but most

of the people that were brainwashed by the hysterics of the 1930's "reefer madness" are passing on to the next great adventure.

The last two Presidents, one pResident and two American Nobel Peace prize winners smoked pot, although Clinton claims to have faked it.

More political leaders, institutions, cities and states have seen the writing on the wall regarding MMJ and/or legalization.

The political tide is definitely turning and it doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize which direction the long term trend regarding legalization is blowing.



I believe MMJ and legalization are inevitable as a byproduct from the growing power of the people which has been enhanced by the growth and influence of the mass two way communication and information dissemination fostered by the Internet.

Authoritarianism is on the wane and the people are pulling back the curtains, the corporate media can't keep it closed anymore.

Uncle Joe

[Bake]

16. I tend to agree with you, but I can't put a figure on it.

5 years? 10? 20? More?

And no, I'm not 90 ...



Bake

[randome]

7. Even when it's about medical marijuana, it's not.

Medical marijuana is the 'gateway' issue to talking about legalization.

I'd say the vast majority of people have no problem with medical marijuana being available. I'd say the vast majority think that decriminalization is a good idea.

If we stopped there, we wouldn't have much to debate.

[Comrade Grumpy]

13. Fully half the country wants to legalize it right now...

per the latest Gallup poll.

[woo me with science]

17. +1 Imagine if public opinion mattered

on austerity budgets, on tax policy, on military spending, on corporate/government censorship of the internet, on warrantless surveillance and the police state, on dealing with the banks....

I'm afraid what 99 percent of the country wants is not in the equation much anymore.

[randome]

20. I still maintain that polls don't always contain the answer.

I think it's relatively easy to say 'put me down for yes' when a poll comes up but it's a different matter when an actual vote comes around. And most of those who polled 'yes' probably don't really care about the issue that much at all.

I have no problem being proven wrong in this, it's just what I think.

[Comrade Grumpy]

22. Check back in November. Pot legalization is on the ballot in two states.

And maybe one or two more by the time November gets here.

Already on the ballot: Colorado, Washington

Could make the ballot: Montana, Oregon

Not gonna happen this year: California, Michigan, Missouri, Nebraska--signature gathering has or will fall short.

[Romulox]

28. Yes. Authoritarians HATE democracy. nt

[frylock]

33. you're arguing against an authortitarian mindset that can't even manage to inform..

themselves on the matter they argue so vehemently against.

[KharmaTrain]

34. Then The Answer Should Be Simple...

I'm all for the legalization of marijuana but as the OP above states it's not a major priority for my vote or that of a large majority of those who will be going to the polls in November. If legalization is so popular (and it may just be) then there should be candidates happy to run on a Pro-MMJ or legalization platform. Make it a "pledge" ala Norquist...and turn this into a winning issue for candidates. Since legalization is "so popular" there should be enough votes in no time to repeal all existing laws.

This is a legislative not an executive issue. Now if Congress passes bills to legalize MMJ and marijuana and the President vetos it...that's another matter...

[randome]

42. But the corporations and the politicians and the pharmaceuticals and the police and...

...the prison system are all against this.

Such a long list of enemies keeping the will of the people in check. What does that wide-ranging conspiracy remind me of? Oh yeah, OWS.

There may be something to ALL of it but if the people demanded change, the system would change. There simply aren't enough people who care STRONGLY about this issue.

Although I wish more cared about decriminalization because I think we would all benefit from that immediately.

[KharmaTrain]

50. Might As Well Scrap The Whole Thing...

I understand the frustrations...I have a lifetime of them of people voting against their own interests. But I don't wear tin foil hats and see everything as some fascist/corporate plot. The legislative system can and does work if those on this side of the sandbox are willing to get "dirty" and learn how to game the system just as the right wingers have been able to do since the late 70s. They work to get people on school boards and build up party organizations that gave them a power base to grow from. It's not sexy and it takes time but if Progressive ideals are to move forward in this country it has to be a political grassroots movement that forces those within the Democratic party to move more towards our common goals and objectives. It's been Progressive gains on the state level that have brought progress in MMJ and decriminalization efforts. If it can be done in places like Colorado and Vermont, it can be done elsewhere and should. Get enough states to decriminalize and it becomes the catalyst for change on the national level.

You are right that many people would benefit from decriminilzation...and there is merit to the many PTB that profit from keeping it illegal and/or maintaining prisons for profit, but one must believe that in people there is strength. Is that not what OWS is supposed to be? Change won't come from sitting on a street corner and yelling...it will be showing up in numbers on election day. Then it requires follow up...holding those politicians accountable. By ignoring the system you give power to those who you are fighting against.

Cheers...

[Nye Bevan]

8. Really? You counted the threads, and there are more about medical marijuana than the economy?

Or are you just engaging in silly hyperbole?

[Bake]

10. Nah, I didn't count the threads. Just the ones that seem to jump out from the page.

Bake

[Bluenorthwest]

56. I didn't count either, but your OP was the only OP on the subject on an entire long page of GD

posts on the GD main page. THE ONLY ONE. And that says so much, so very much about your agenda here. 16 States plus DC have passed Medical Marijuana laws with voter majorities. This means that in 16 States, the issue is important enough that the people spent years organizing and working to pass good laws, which they did with strong majorities. To pretend that does not represent a issue that is important to people is just absurd and wishful thinking.
Additionally, the support for those laws and for legalization itself is bipartisan, and Obama often claims bipartisanship is hugely important to him, although he rarely manages to get any votes from the other Party. He could on this one.
Also, anyone who reads the demographics can see clearly that the minority of voters (largely Republican, older and in the South) who oppose marijuana law reform are the very voters who would never vote for Obama, no matter what, no matter who is his opponent. Why? They are not reason based, they are prejudiced, right wing, superstitious and ignorant.
If he were to live up to his campaign rhetoric he'd please many millions of his own voters while losing none, none at all. Too bad the racist policy is so deeply important to him, much like 'sanctity' is his priority on civil rights, not equality, 'sanctity'.

[JoePhilly]

11. The topic of outrage drifts from week to week.

It'll be medical marijuana for a while, regular threads on it for a while.

Then the outrage will shift to something new for a while.

Sometimes it appears as if what ever Obama is making a priority right now, well, X should be the top priority. And its not!!

Lately, X = Medical MJ .... next week, X will be something else.

[Bluenorthwest]

59. The fact is the reform movement is one of the most organized and continuously successful

segments of our Party's base. They are people who have passed legislation in many States, who have changed minds on a massive scale. That did not happen in reaction to Obama, kiddo. It was going on long before his national presence, much less his Presidency. It was going on when he was at Occidental college trying on hats for photo shoots. It was going on when he was in the State House, when he was a US Senator. The movement is a long term thing, with majority support in many Obama States.
Like marriage equality and health care reform, much of the energy for marijuana reform sprang from the AIDS crisis and the fact that honest people became criminals under the law for holding compassion for those suffering.
When I think of this issue, I think of my friend JT who died so young with so much talent, and how he was so sick from the sickness and from the medications, slowly starving. When provided with marijuana he could sit and eat, the food would stay in his system, and then, blessed magic and the hand of the divine, he could pick up his guitar and express himself in song. Without the 'criminal' medicine, he'd lay there puking. Puking until he died. Lucky for him, he was surrounded with compassionate people, not with those thinking of themselves and their religious dogmas or ignorant and calloused prejudices.
I understand that when you read about medical marijuana, you think of Obama. I think of JT. And of the millions like him. And I know that folks who are about the politicians did not go to the bedsides, do not visit the sick or the dying, for if they did, it is they who would find themselves reformed and advocating for reform.

[JoePhilly]

65. "Kiddo" .. humm ... ok, I'll skip that, not worth it ... but a few points for you to consider.

The OP asked a question about the General Discussion forum, and the apparent increase in Medical MJ OPs appearing there.

And the OP actually mentions Obama ...

Obama may not be the friendliest president to the med mar folks, but there's a whole lot more important things going on.

Did you miss that? You must have because you start your last paragraph with this ...

I understand that when you read about medical marijuana, you think of Obama.

So let me clear this up for you (I won't put "kiddo" here, but I did consider it) ... when I read about Medical MJ, I don't automatically think about Obama, but if he is mentioned, then yes, I think about both.

Now, if I was reading an OP about medical MJ, where Obama was not being referenced, then I don't really think about him. For instance, if the topic was "Getting pro medical MJ laws passed in NC", I'd be saying "Ok, let's do it". See, I support medical MJ.

The OP asked about what he perceived as an increase in Medical MJ OPs in GD ... and I responded as to why ... if you go through the medical MJ threads in GD, they are almost all "anti-Obama".

BTW ... the weekly outrage that I mention in that post ... well ... its already shifting. Biden makes a comment about supporting Gay marriage, and BOOM, GD starts to see more OPs attacking Obama. Two weeks ago, it was drones (to counter anniversary of getting OBL).

Next week it will be something different ... maybe another round of "Obama is about to kill Social Security", that one makes the rounds from time to time.

We'll see.

[Better Believe It]

12. So do you support or oppose the Obama administrations war on medical pot?

You're position on this wasn't clear to me.

Do you support the federal government raids and other actions against medical pot providers or not?

I'm listening.

[Bake]

14. I oppose it.

But I oppose Mitt Rmoney and the Thugs a lot more. MM isn't the only issue that matters to me.

Bake

[TBF]

19. I hear what you're saying -

but it's an important issue and I think folks are correct to be annoyed about it. If we didn't say anything than the cry would be "but nobody said anything about that" so I think allowing the ranting is important. It doesn't mean people are going to suddenly go crazy and run off to vote for libertarians.

[Better Believe It]

32. But you think progressives should not criticize the Obama administrations war on medical pot?

Or just not raise such objections on Democratic Underground?

[Bake]

39. Neither, not at all.

For me, personally, I just think re-electing the President is the most important thing to this country right now.

If we fail to re-elect Obama:

1. The poor lose.
2. Women lose.
3. People of color lose.
4. The middle class loses.
5. The rich, and ONLY the rich, win.
6. We lose THE SUPREME COURT for a generation.

And that's just for starters. I like to think that we can work on other issues after the election. Maybe that's rose-colored glasses on my part. But I cannot imagine what happens if we lose this fall.

Bake

[Better Believe It]

45. So we should ignore all political issues since the only thing that matters is re-electing Obama?

[Bake]

48. You're going to do whatever you're going to do.

I cannot and would not try to stop you. I hope you'll go to the polls in November and vote for Democrats.

Bake

[Better Believe It]

55. That's not an answer to my question.

[Bake]

62. I belive I've answered whatever question you may be posing.

Should we all ignore whatever it is that's up your ass?

NO. But do you really want to see a Rethug in the White House? REALLY? Because if you do, get the fuck out of DU right now.

No. Nothing is more important than keeping the White House and winning a majority in Congress. If you can't see that, I really feel sorry for you. You can go smoke a doob and ignore reality, perhaps, and feel better. The rest of us will have to pick up the pieces.

This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in the OP. In case you hadn't noticed.

Bake

[NCTraveler]

37. Then you will be very happy to know...

that there are more negative ops about mittens on the first page than there are about mm. This also makes your op kind of confusing.

[Capt. Obvious]

18. 2 threads on page 1 with marijuana in the title. One is this thread

This is a crisis on the scale of gang stalking.

[Bake]

49. Threads with MM in the title? Doesn't tell the whole story.

Thread count matters with sheets.

Bake

[Capt. Obvious]

52. MM produces 2 hits - none about marijuana

It's like all they're talking bout is mary jane man ya know

[Bluenorthwest]

58. You keep making that sheet joke, yet your OP is all about counting the threads in GD and claiming

too many are regarding reform of the racist and ignorant drug policies. The irony of that is harsh to look at.

[Bake]

60. Go smoke a doob. You'll feel better.

Until Mittens gets elected.

Bake

[msongs]

21. this administration opposes things that BENEFIT people and imposes things that kill

that's where medical pot is an issue worth discussing

[Jamaal510]

23. I'm getting annoyed with seeing all the 420 threads myself.

Just the past week, I have bumped into at least a dozen threads about how PBO is tough on 420 users. I do think the policy regarding 420 should be changed. And IDK if anyone suggested this already, but my solution is that 420 should be under the same policy as alcohol, where everyone is free to smoke it as long as they are over a certain age, and are not doing it while driving or in public places.

[kiva]

24. Actually not nearly as pervasive as some topics here.

There are times when a single issue takes over the whole GD page - this isn't close to that level.

[Bake]

25. Actually, yes you are correct!

But this one sure got a lot of responses!



Bake

[kiva]

53. And that's the point of a discussion board.

Fun when it works!

[marlakay]

26. The marijuana people don't even agree

On what to do...

I live in WA state and plan to vote yes on 502, but at my husbands medical dispensary they are telling everyone not to vote for it.

So if a lot of patients vote no it won't pass.

It's not the best bill but I feel we should unite and start somewhere. The problem is people always think they should be able to vote in the best from day one and that's hard to get.

[obxhead]

27. Yeah, destruction of lives and families really is a back burner issue.

Nothing to see here, buck up and follow the important issues!

[Bake]

31. What I'm saying is it does not warrant sitting out the election

Much less, God forbid, voting for Ron Paul. Perspective matters.

Bake

[DocMac]

51. No one is gonna sit out the election.

You gotta let people vent. And Ron Paul said he would leave the matter to the states. Ron Paul don't really give a shit. He's pandering for their votes under the guise of state rights.

[Bluenorthwest]

57. Your problem here is that you are not taking into account the fact that the marijuana law reform

movement is among the most organized and informed political subsets, hugely Democratic and wildly successful not only in elections and legislative victory, also in changing the mind set of the opposition. It took years and millions to get to this point. No set of Democratic voters is more specifically and fully aware of the libertarian idiocy in general and of Ron Paul in specific than those in the marijuana and drug law reform movements. The only people who might support Paul are Republicans, for Paul is a Republican, and as such he is opposed to nearly everything the majority of those in that movement support. And they know this.
It is surprising to me that the President does not pop a large one over the bipartisan support for reform. He is always saying he's all about bipartisanship. Yet those 'supporting' him freak out when they see any Republican supporting that which Democrats also support. So which is it? Is bipartisanship a terrible thing, and any contact with 'them' a dangerous risk of losing our voters to them? Or is it as the President often says, the way it is all supposed to work. Obama calls Tom fucking Coburn his 'good friend'. On the other hand, marijuana reform advocates other than the Republican ones despise Paul, and say so. Paul and libertarians do not agree with Democratic reform advocates at all. They attempt to appear as if they do, and exploit that, the attempt fails, and has failed for many long years. If you were in the movement, or even aware of it, you would know that. Marijuana reformers know what Paul is, a Republican who is opposed to virtually everything we stand for, including the sort of marijuana and drug reform we support. There are other Republicans who support reform as well, it is easy to agree with them on that and still say 'Dana, you are a right wing nut' on all other things.
So your concerns are founded in your own lack of information on the subject. To me, this post I am replying to is just flat out silly. Based on your own fears, not on facts, nor on past elections, nor on the actual opinions of the American electorate.
The folks who are opposed to reform are the exact folks who will never vote for Obama. Those 'independents' or conservatives who might vote for him tend to support reform. At this point, the strong opponents are in the minority, mostly in specific regions, States the President will not win anyway. He can not get that 30% of nutters, no matter what. And they are the opponents of reform and of Obama. The supporters of reform are supporters of Obama. Thus, to support would cost him nothing, gain him much good will and passion and money, although few will actually not vote for him if he doesn't, millions would find enthusiasm if he did.

[Bake]

61. Wildly successful? Wildly? Really?

Because it looks to me like federal law is still the same, and it trumps state law every time.

Bake

[Romulox]

29. More passive aggressive support for the War on (people who use) Drugs. Duly noted. nt

[Bake]

30. Thanks so much for the condescension.

I think it is an IMPORTANT issue, but it is NOT the defining issue of our times.

Bake

[frylock]

35. you post this crap OP and then whine about condescension?!

fucking rich, man.

[NCTraveler]

36. 3 ops on the first page, one of them is yours.

Some people just notice it more and it makes them uncomfortable.

[Bake]

41. Doesn't make me uncomfortable.

Losing to the Rethugs in the fall makes me uncomfortable.

And it's not the number of threads so much as it is the number/tone of responses in the threads that are there. I thought thread count referred to sheets.

Bake

[Rex]

38. Not really. Maybe when you posted the OP.

Doesn't look like that now.

[GeorgeGist]

40. Oh jeez ...

/small

[randome]

46. I've seen that pic quite a few times.

It doesn't get old.

[madinmaryland]

63. Ironic that someone with the SN "Bake" is whining about pot threads!!

[Bake]

64. That's "Bake," not "Baked" dammit!

Put your glasses on, Grandpa!



Bake

[The Midway Rebel]

66. The issue is a metaphor.

The issue is a metaphor for the double speak of politicians in general. It is no coincidence the Drug War started at the same time as the Right Wing onslaught of the New Deal and civil liberties.

http://stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/2011/oct/29/white_house_rebuffs_marijuana_le

How many times do we have to tell these motherfuckers? How long will they make a mockery of democracy and of representative government?

How long will we let them deny sick and dying people a researched and provable therapy?

How long are we going to let them keep putting our brothers and sisters in jail for this shit?


Think about that.