HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Hillary Clinton is *NOT* ...

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:36 PM

 

Hillary Clinton is *NOT* for pot legalization.

I'm sick of her sycophants spreading this lie. Hillary is for changing pot from a SCHEDULE-I drug to a SCHEDULE-II drug (SCHEDULE-II is the same as Morphine, Cocaine, and Methamphetamine). This keeps it *highly* illegal, with long prison terms possible for even possession (just as they are for Cocaine, another SCHEULDE-II drug).

The only effective change is that this means Marijuana, and derivatives could be used as medicine, as it is illegal to use any Schedule-I substance as medicine.

So why is Hillary for this?
-Out of the goodness of her heart? No
-Because it will help people? No
-So we can research this more(as the article implies)? No
-Because it would help Big Pharma? (and keep Big Prison happy) BINGO!!!!!!!

The Pharma industry likes this move because it allows them to market the active ingredient, and make derivatives, while keeping the raw plant *highly* illegal (refer to Opium Poppy for the gameplan). The prison industry loves this because it doesn't slow down the flow of (mostly minority) new inmates..

Don't it just touch your heart how well our government works together with our Pharma and Prison corporations? (and against our people) Almost brings a team to my eye.

Seriously, this enrages me and I have to laugh to keep from hitting something. Marijuana should be COMPLETELY UNSCHEDULED federally, like alcohol.

40 replies, 2883 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 40 replies Author Time Post
Reply Hillary Clinton is *NOT* for pot legalization. (Original post)
jack_krass Apr 2016 OP
vt_native Apr 2016 #1
JaneyVee Apr 2016 #5
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #8
MADem Apr 2016 #13
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #17
jack_krass Apr 2016 #21
Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #40
NWCorona Apr 2016 #2
CentralCoaster Apr 2016 #3
beedle Apr 2016 #4
insta8er Apr 2016 #6
B Calm Apr 2016 #11
Maedhros Apr 2016 #27
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2016 #7
rhett o rick Apr 2016 #9
MADem Apr 2016 #15
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #20
lumberjack_jeff Apr 2016 #26
questionseverything Apr 2016 #32
nolawarlock Apr 2016 #37
Jackie Wilson Said Apr 2016 #10
jack_krass Apr 2016 #16
rjsquirrel Apr 2016 #12
MADem Apr 2016 #18
jack_krass Apr 2016 #22
MADem Apr 2016 #23
jack_krass Apr 2016 #24
MADem Apr 2016 #34
Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #30
MADem Apr 2016 #33
jack_krass Apr 2016 #19
questionseverything Apr 2016 #29
Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #31
questionseverything Apr 2016 #35
Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #38
questionseverything Apr 2016 #39
Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #36
reddread Apr 2016 #14
SalviaBlue Apr 2016 #25
Warren DeMontague Apr 2016 #28

Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:39 PM

1. Supporting the private prison industry is depraved

Think of all the lives ruined.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to vt_native (Reply #1)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:42 PM

5. Vermont is one of the only states that ships prisoners to private prisons.

 

And has the 4th highest black incarceration rate in America.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:44 PM

8. So you favor the Clinton Prisons for Profits industry?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:52 PM

13. Shhhhh--stop making sense! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:55 PM

17. I did know that.

But not surprising.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #5)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:04 PM

21. Thanks for the helping me make my point. nt.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JaneyVee (Reply #5)

Wed Apr 27, 2016, 03:02 AM

40. So do you support legalization, or not?

Because for all its flaws, VT is probably going to put it through sooner rather than later, while NY implements another one of these state medical marijuana regimes where the stuff is harder to obtain than plutonium.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:39 PM

2. Hillary is for the war on drugs nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:41 PM

3. She is beholden to the medical industry and big pharma

 

and the prison industrial complex.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:42 PM

4. Clinton continues to line her pocket and the pockets of her paymasters

 

on the backs of the 'super-predator' class.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:42 PM

6. I mean the information is here, how come those that support her don't ask these questions?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to insta8er (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:48 PM

11. Conservatives are against marijuana legalization.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to insta8er (Reply #6)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:37 PM

27. This excerpt from Aaron Sorkin's "The American President" (1995) covers it:

 

I've known Bob Rumsford for years, and I've been operating under the assumption that the reason Bob devotes so much time and energy to shouting at the rain was that he simply didn't get it. Well, I was wrong. Bob's problem isn't that he doesn't get it. Bob's problem is that he can't sell it! We have serious problems to solve, and we need serious people to solve them. And whatever your particular problem is, I promise you, Bob Rumson is not the least bit interested in solving it. He is interested in two things and two things only: making you afraid of it and telling you who's to blame for it. That, ladies and gentlemen, is how you win elections.


Substitute "The Democratic Party" for "Bob Rumsford", and "reviling the Republicans" for "shouting at the rain."

As for why ostensible 'liberals' support Clinton?

Lewis Rothschild: People want leadership, Mr. President, and in the absence of genuine leadership, they'll listen to anyone who steps up to the microphone. They want leadership. They're so thirsty for it they'll crawl through the desert toward a mirage, and when they discover there's no water, they'll drink the sand.
President Andrew Shepherd: Lewis, we've had Presidents who were beloved who couldn't find a coherent sentence with two hands and a flashlight. People don't drink the sand 'cause they're thirsty. They drink the sand 'cause they don't know the difference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:43 PM

7. I find it interesting that Clinton can be the candidate for the prison industry... and POC.

 

Someone's getting bullshitted.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:45 PM

9. Not Black Lives Matter

 

Here are some important points made by Black Lives Matter Activist Ashley Williams:

“Here's the truth: the Clinton legacy has left our prisons bursting at the seams. Real lives have been destroyed as a result. It is an indisputable fact that millions of Black people were locked up for drug crimes and provided the bodies for the expansion of the prison industry.

The 1994 Crime Bill that she so vigorously defended not only expanded incarceration, but stripped funding for college education from prisoners. The Clinton legacy allowed for policies that prevented anyone convicted of a felony drug offense from receiving food stamps or income assistance. Clinton-led welfare reform fundamentally ripped apart the social safety net.”


“Make no mistake, Hillary Clinton's efforts to push these policies resulted in the continued destruction of Black communities and the swift growth of our mass incarceration crisis.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rhett o rick (Reply #9)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:54 PM

15. Who of the two Democratic candidates, actually VOTED FOR THAT BILL???

Here's a hint: It wasn't Hillary Clinton.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #7)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:01 PM

20. If I were a POC

I would be pretty offended at the insinuation you're making here that, somehow, POC are just naturally destined for prison. While I certainly accept that there is an unfair rate of incarceration for POC.

And, that one issue aside, POC themselves have stated on this site numerous times that they are not one-issue candidates. There are many reasons for POC to support Hillary Clinton. Heck, a POC who owns a corporation and is anti-abortion might even choose a Republican candidate. Why is it that any group of people must somehow have a template for who they should vote for. It's so condescending and trivializing, not only of POC as a whole, but of the individual who may identify with any number of different policy positions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolawarlock (Reply #20)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:31 PM

26. Insinuation? Let me be clearer; it's all head-fake.

 

You can't be against incarceration of minorities AND FOR the stupid and arbitrary laws that disproportionately put minorities behind bars.

But Clinton is a master of having it both ways, and it is to our great suffering that her supporters/paid shills allow/leverage it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #26)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:45 PM

32. they love the pot laws...they can bust most the population at anytime

they have decimated the 4th amendment over it

basically they lock up half the population while bankrupting the other half to pay for it

win/win for the 1%

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lumberjack_jeff (Reply #26)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:58 PM

37. I would reply ...

But everything I already said answered your points.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:47 PM

10. Did not know this, while you dont link any of this I do figure it is possible.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jackie Wilson Said (Reply #10)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:55 PM

16. that's because I'm not reposting an existing article, but here's something:

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)


Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #12)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:57 PM

18. Pot is going to go the way of marriage equality, state-by-state.

Already most states have reduced it to a revenue enhancer. Get caught, get a ticket, pay a fine. Soon even that will go by the wayside.

It was so CRAZY illegal in Jamrock--even though everyone I know down there does it. If you get caught you simply bribe the po-leezman.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:10 PM

22. Ahh a States-rights advocate...

 

Sorry, but this has to be done Federally, and NOW. We can't continue this ridiculous system where it's legal in a couple states, illegal at the Federal, and quasi-legal in other states. This gets you arbitrary enforcement, where prosecutors have the power to prosecute you, but usually don't, but could if they don't like the way you look or something.

I'll fight for federal legalization. You go ahead and keep bribing cops while the grown-ups do the heavy work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #22)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:16 PM

23. No, that would be Bernie Sanders. He IS a states' rights advocate-

in fact, that was the argument he used when he argued, in 2006--for civil unions rather than marriage for VT during his first Senate run. Look it up--CSPAN carried that debate.

And "States' rights" is the argument Bernie Sanders uses when he pooh-poohs federal gun legislation.

Now...what was that you were saying about advocacy?

You seem to mistake having sufficient literacy to read the handwriting on the wall for advocacy.

You really shouldn't do that, as it shows you to be an imprecise thinker.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #23)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:25 PM

24. I accept your surrender on the OP topic. If you want to talk about guns and gay marriage,

 

please start another thread. I'll be happy to teach you some lessons there as well (if you;re wrong)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #24)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:46 PM

34. LOL--you're flailing, pal. You can't teach yourself how to get out

of a conversation where your misstatements have overwhelmed even you!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MADem (Reply #18)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:41 PM

30. I suspect if she was really likely to get tough on weed, snoop dogg wouldnt have endorsed her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #30)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:45 PM

33. I think you're right on that score! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rjsquirrel (Reply #12)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:59 PM

19. "Big Cannabis will soon be funneling millions of dollars to the Clinton Foundation"

 

I don't think so.

Big Pharma is richer than Big Cannabis, and they already have their hooks into Hillary(ie they've already bought her). What I see happening is Big Pharma developing products from derivatives of THC, and keeping the plant illegal, like Opium and Oxy/Hydro/etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Reply #19)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:41 PM

29. that is exactly what we will get under hc

when the crime bill put a hundred thousand cops on the street it supposedly was to fight crack but 99 times out of a hundred it was pot busts

obama has not pushed for mj busts so people forget but the clintons will never allow mj to become legal, never, never,never

she is too tied to the for profit prison industry and big pharma

how do i know this?

because i remember what they have done before

she started the campaign being against even medical, said she wanted more research,nothing has changed

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to questionseverything (Reply #29)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:43 PM

31. Well shit- look at the patriot act. The "vital tools to fight terror" were used almost exclusively

To arrest people for pot smoking, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #31)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:49 PM

35. yes the dea illegally uses parallel construction to convict citizens it has illegally spied on

the entire thing is so stupid

we have money problems and taxing weed is the easiest way out

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to questionseverything (Reply #35)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:59 PM

38. Phooo, don't even get me started on THAT one.

"parallel construction"-- call me old fashioned, but I always thought "lying in court" was against the law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #38)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 09:03 PM

39. used to be

but like torture, no one was punished so i guess it is okey dokey now

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warren DeMontague (Reply #31)


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 07:54 PM

14. because there is money in it. Legalization would destroy that enterprise.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:27 PM

25. This is an unacceptable position.

"Seriously, this enrages me and I have to laugh to keep from hitting something. Marijuana should be COMPLETELY UNSCHEDULED federally, like alcohol. "

I agree with you completely!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jack_krass (Original post)

Mon Apr 25, 2016, 08:37 PM

28. She's being slow, and cautious, and listening to beltway conventional wisdom voices who dont really

Understand either millennials or the country west of the rockies.

And i support sanders on this- call the drug war a failure, deschedule cannabis; its not just the right thing to do, its the politically savvy one. The only people outside the DEA who still support the drug war are chris christie (and look how well HE did) and debbie wasserman schultz.

That said, hillary's answers on this (this time around, at least) could have been worse. If she doesnt take a radically different tack from obama, legalization will keep moving forward state by state, and the momentum will only build for it nationally.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread