agricultural hemp would be immediately a 1/4 Trillion dollar industry, even before it frees us from foreign oil, THAT IS WHY IT IS ILLEGAL.. !! BEST, CLEANEST RENEWABLE BIO-DIESEL THERE IS. then there is the building materials, chemicals/resin/plastics, non toxic base for oil paint, textiles, animal feed, human food, fiber for clothes, non acid paper..
I agree with the whole "let's end the drug war, let's tax it, let's have it for medicine and fuel and fabric" idea, but start a new single-issue party that doesn't have a chance in hell of beating Democrats or Republicans in any but a tiny number of races?
6. I'm with you on that. I'm done with him, We The People are being betrayed in so many ways:
-- mj/hemp -- no backing for legalization -- war in Afghanistan -- no prosecution of war criminals/traitors/blatant lawbreakers -- health care -- single-payer "would raise taxes" so it's out -- handover of our tax dollars to wealthy welfare recipients for jets, yachts, "bonuses" -- "bipartisan" bullshit that simply dilutes any effort at progressive legislation -- DLC/fake Democrat/right wing appointees -- retention of as many of bushco's lawyers in DOJ as wanted to stay -- continuation of rendition, and Guantanamo detainees still held without being charged -- calling Chavez a "terrorist" instead of taking the golden opportunity to enjoy a good relationship with our neighbors to the south = ASININE
If you're not a billionaire, just as with *, you don't count, and if it doesn't have to do with war war war war war and Wall Street, it doesn't count.
this was a "community organizer"? community of bankers, perhaps.
10. Yeah, sure, that approach will get the job done.
Look, I agree with you (and Herer) in theory, but relying on a "political party" that's only platform is legalizing MJ gives the rest of the country the impression that you're just a bunch of potheads sitting around yelling because you're pissed that the plant is still illegal.
Instead, why not soldier on and make your case by showing your support for Democrats like Tom Ammiano in CA or Jim Webb with what they are proposing?
What I fear is that some of the talking heads are right. Obama is a cult to some like Bush was to the Freeps. There is apparently no disagreeing with Obama on DU. If you do disagree you are being petty and your outrage is "faux". Just because there is no real case for keeping pot illegal, just because every single argument can be refuted in the blink of an eye, just because Obama is DEAD FUCKING WRONG about this issue, doesn't mean you are allowed to say that. No we have to be good little Dems and march in fucking lock step or... or... or... someone might call us names on DU!!!! I've stayed away from here for a few months and came back to being called a lazy whiny pothead. Well that's good enough for me, it's on DU so it must be true.
Oh and BTW great links man, here's another.. Maybe if you can't make them understand how much could be coming in they will get it when they see how much is going out.
16. Well this is the first "changing party" post I've seen
I haven't written Obama off by a long shot but yet if I say anything that disagrees with him I become a "whiny pothead". What really pisses me off is the people here should know better.
Like I said if I had posted that I disagreed with Bush on legalization I would have had hundreds of supporters. When I disagree with Obama about the same thing I see these pathetic posts about how I knew what I was getting when I voted and I should just shut up and stop this "faux outrage".
This issue has become more than just legalization, it has become a litmus test for DU.
Sorry but I never bought into the my candidate/my party/my country right or wrong crap. I never saw one post that made a decent argument for not legalizing all I saw was pot smokers being berated for not bowing down to Obama even though he is dead wrong.
I can understand why the OP wants to switch parties, he's certainly been told in so many words that he is not wanted around here.
17. I guess Obama's been attacked so much from the right, that when it's the left criticizing him,
people get just as defensive even though they shouldn't. I for one have never told anyone to "shut up" when criticizing Obama, in part because nothing written on a fucking *message board* could possibly undermine the man.
18. Exactly.. this is a message board. Not a goddamn litmus test.
It's supposed to be about sharing ideas and at one time it was. I used to spend hours here every day. Now I check in on the Top Ten and make a post once a week or so. It's a damn shame that many people want this place to be nothing than the polar opposite of FR.
Oh and if you thought I was laying the name calling at your feet I apologize there are many DU'ers like yourself who are fair minded, free thinking and clever, but there are too many really loud ones who aren't.
Yep, I went to them all, and I have to say that it was more than disappointing to hear Obama make a joke out of this, and out of the online community. The prison population for marijuana crimes, alone, is reason enough to take the possible legalization seriously. I understand that out and out voiced approval would have been a political mistake at this point, but to make a joke? Very disappointing.
Oh, and I don't smoke pot. At all. I have an adverse reaction to it. Or, at least I did the last 3 times I tried it, over 20 years ago.
24. Excuse me while I go hilariously laugh offline for a moment
Edited on Fri Mar-27-09 08:37 PM by Jennicut
Okay, over marijuana, really? Go find a 3rd party then. Greens? Libertarians? Where ya gonna go? I want it legalized too but then again I am 33 not 21 anymore. One issue does not make or break a Presidency. Good luck on finding a more pure leftist leader. Nader is still looking for love. This is Democratic Underground after all. I am a-okay with criticisms but 2 months in and ready to ditch already? Were you around for the epic battles of Clinton back in the 1990's from the left and the right? They were not pretty. Obama is way more to the left then Clinton anyways.
I was annoyed at the way he handled the question yesterday. He could have given the same answer without being flip and dismissive. Now I see he completely and purposely mis-characterized the question into something totally different. That was completely unnecessary and harmful. Very disappointing to say the least.
He's barely started his Presidency, so I'm in no way even thinking of writing him off. Not at all. But he doesn't seem to have any intention of instituting single payer health care that isn't beholden to insurance companies. He apparently wants to take things real slow like on this. Don't want to upset anybody. And I'm certainly not looking for any significant reform of the Federal drug laws any time soon either.
The thing that bugs me about this is that Bush, or whoever the hell was in charge, was able to do just about any goddamned thing he wanted to do, any goddamned time he wanted to do it, and fuck anybody who didn't like it. Those pricks did whatever the hell they wanted for 8 years. I'd like to see the Democrats get just a little ruthless for once. They're in power now. Figure out what the right thing to do is, and then go ahead and get it done in a fucking hurry. If it's a bad idea, the sooner we find out the better. If it's a good idea that benefits society then the Democratic vote will be locked up and enough repugs will realize things are better and the 2010 and 2012 elections shouldn't be anything to fear.
"Overall, the researchers say, 18,314 people die in the USA each year because they lack preventive services, a timely diagnosis or appropriate care." This from IOM (Institute of Medicine) a non-profit organization of experts that advises Congress on health issues in a 2002 report. I never heard of them, but even if they're off by 50%, that still means over 9,000 deaths per year due to lack of adequate medical coverage for everyone. Now, if all of a sudden we started losing 9,0000 a year in Iraq, 24 soldiers every fucking day, you can bet the party in power would be working overtime to get THAT stopped in a hurry. Yet at least 9000 people ARE dying each year because of inadequate health care and we're apparently going to get some half-assed solution that won't discomfit in any way those who already have health care. They been used to a certain system for a long time and it might be a little jarring if things are changed up too much.
up thread, but didn't manage to explain myself as well as you. I understand Obama's choice not to take a stand on this issue so early in his presidency. It makes perfect sense to me. I do, however, find myself wondering how a creative, intelligent politician like Obama might answer a question like this, to the satisfaction of his party. Because I do expect so much more from him, as I should, I can't help but feel disappointed when he behaves in much the way I would if I were sidestepping the issue.
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion
board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules
page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the
opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent
the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.