Medical Marijuana: Another Obama Campaign Promise Broken!

[Xicano]

Dispensary Raids In Hollywood As Obama Breaks Promise

Drug Enforcement Agency agents, with the help of the Los Angeles Police Department and Los Angeles Sheriff's Department, raided two medical marijuana dispensaries in West Hollywood, California on Tuesday. It was the first such action in the city since the Obama Administration decided two years ago to take a hands-off approach to dispensaries in compliance with state laws.

The federal warrants were served on the Zen Healing Collective and on Alternative Herbal Health Services, and one individual was taken into custody, which may result in arrest. Both shops were among the four dispensaries the city had authorized to operate, reports John Hoeffel at The Los Angeles Times.

West Hollywood was one of the first California cities to regulate medical marijuana, and is often cited as model for how well medicinal cannabis can be handled by a municipality.

"This is incredibly unsettling that the DEA would strike permitted collectives in a sanctuary city," said Dege Coutee of the Patient Advocacy Network. "I hope that this is not going to be indicative for what the rest of our summer season will look like."

--

When asked in February 2009 about raids on medical marijuana dispensaries in California, Attorney General Eric Holder indicated raids would end on state-approved dispensaries.

http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/03/dispensary_raids_in_hollywood_as_obama_breaks_prom.php




Click for video

Feds Threaten Marijuana Dispensaries Nationwide

In a little-publicized memo, the U.S. federal government has indicated that the gloves are off regarding medical marijuana dispensaries, regardless of state laws.

Previous memos had indicated a loosening of federal prosecutions of medical marijuana; however the new memo states very clearly that the feds consider all dispensaries illegal under federal law and that their prosecution is a "core priority" of federal agents, according to the Cannabis Therapy Institute (CTI).

The "Haag Memo" , written on February 1, 2011 from U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag (Northern District of California) to Oakland City Attorney John A. Russo, was a response to an Oakland City Council request for guidance regarding medical marijuana and federal law. The memo was written with consultation and approval from U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, according to CTI.


http://www.tokeofthetown.com/2011/03/feds_threaten_marijuana_dispensaries_nationwide.php

[GodlessBiker]

1. Bastards.

[Octafish]

59. Don't want people to get high.

They could care less about sick people.
Or even sick people getting their pain eased.
Or even sick people getting better.

The fascist bastards hate the weed because it makes people think.

[villager]

2. "I 'hope' you don't mind if I 'change' my promises!"

n/t

[Xicano]

3. "change we can believe in"

[elocs]

4. I don't believe Obama "breaks" promises, he simply "adjusts" them to fit the circumstances,

depending on which way the wind is blowing.

[Poll_Blind]

5. On medical marijuana candidate Obama straight-up LIED, frequently, both formally and informally.

During the campaign there were a number of times which he spoke both formally and informally about making sure that the Federal government would not waste resources in order to circumvent state law in regards to medical marijuana. His common sense approach not only jived with my own, it was obvious given the state of things.

For instance, this interview- from 1:30 on, specifically, with his most telling answer beginning at 2:11. The answer he gave starting around 2:11 was his stock answer. I've seen videos of him giving the same answer in front of large crowds and candidly, in one one one with supporters who ask him the question as he's speaking with them after a rally.

Honestly, medical marijuana is no where near my highest priority as far as things that need to get fixed in Washington. But it was, I believe, the very first issue where I started to notice a major deviation after election from his stated campaign position.

The first of many.

Maybe one of the reasons I don't fall for the "Obama's hands are tied" argument is because there are far too many examples of issues where, as the president, he has the authority to follow through with a campaign promise or position.

And just simply doesn't.

As Sam Seder famously said (paraphrasing) it actually doesn't matter why Obama has done these things. Really, if you think about it- at this stage of the game- it just doesn't. What does matter is that this is how President Obama is acting and you just have to move forward under the assumption that all of his actions after being elected are an indicator of his actions in the future.

In 2012, he's basically going to either wind up running against himself in 2008 or trying to hit just the right note to grab undecideds and some Republican voters and some Democratic voters. I don't see that working out for him very well.

PB

[slay]

6. Yeah this really pisses me off

another lie by Obama - but more than that - what about the people who really NEED marijuana for cancer, AIDS, etc? This is fucked up, wrong, and must stop. i don't see how i can vote for Obama in 2012 at this point.

[jberryhill]

10. So you know for a fact this dispensary wasn't violating CA law?

Why was LA county involved in the raid?

[ReggieVeggie]

14. did you read he article?

D E A agents....that's the federal agency

[jberryhill]

22. Yeah, joined by local police

I have no idea why this business was raided, and neither do you.

CA has a medical marijuana law. That doesn't mean that it is impossible for a dispensary to be violating it, and the DOJ has specifically said they will go after business which do not follow the CA law, or business that are violating other laws.

[ReggieVeggie]

30. you have a vested interest in believing they were doing something wrong

You should read up on other dispensary raids...local police, sheriff, and state police are usually always involved...still the DEA's control

[jberryhill]

37. LOL yeah - a "vested interest"

Uh-huh.

So, a couple of weeks ago, I was in LA and decided to hang out at Venice Beach for a while. Having spent a good chunk of grad school following the Dead on breaks, it's nice to soak up a little atmosphere from time to time.

As we all know, you can't walk down the boardwalk without being solicited by the "get legal" guys in front of the dispensaries with "Doctor on Duty" and a convenient sign listing symptoms for which they will issue a card. Now, I understand that the law is limited to California residents, so I say "I wish I could, but I'm not a California resident."

One of the guys promoting a dispensary tells me "You should go inside and talk to the doctor. I see foreign tourists going in there all of the time and coming out with it." Another one told me to find someone on the beach with a prescription to get it for me.

A friend of mine with a prescription later told me that some of the clinics will take the address of a hotel as a "residence", and you can say you just moved to CA.

Now, personally, I think marijuana laws are stupid as a class. However, if you want to pretend there are not a lot of shenanigans going on, then you are going to lose the limited good thing that has been accomplished in CA.

There is a lot of rule bending, open nuisance, funny accounting, and diversion going on. Again, you can remain blind to it, but it can quite possibly set things back.

These operations need to be squeaky clean and absolutely compliant. Of course, they are under a microscope, and of course we all know why. Again, me? I don't have an issue with it, but the carnival atmosphere surrounding this thing where you walk in, say "I have carpal tunnel and it's really bothering me," and walk out with marijuana, can be what kills a good thing.

[ReggieVeggie]

44. medical diagnoses and prescriptions are always somewhat subjective

If I went to one doctor with a certain set of symptoms, she might prescribe Drugs A and B with a certain dosage. Go to another doctor with the same symptoms, he might prescribe Drugs A, C, and H with different dosages.

I appreciate the medical cannabis movemnet, but I'm of the mind that the plant shouldn't be illegal at all, much less worry about who it's prescribed to and why.

[jberryhill]

51. Well then we are on overall agreement

And sophistry about subjective medical judgments aside, these doctors aren't advertising in the back pages of free weeklies in order to tout their vast medical knowledge and clinical skill.

Marijuana should be legal. PERIOD! Using the "medical marijuana" laws as a wink-wink, nudge-nudge proposition endangers the well being of profoundly I'll people who can benefit the most.

[Xicano]

34. "DOJ has specifically said they will go after business which do not follow the CA law"

Really?

Then explain this:

[Egnever]

79. Funny that that has to be truncated to make your point

Why not include the whole paragraph? Or did you not read the whole memo and only go off what some blogger told you to think?

Just for clarity the whole memo can be found here http://www.cannabistherapyinstitute.com/legal/feds/doj.haag.memo.pdf

And the paragraph that you so conveniently left parts out of is....

The prosecution of individuals and organizations involved in the trade of any illegal drugs
and the disruption of drug trafficking organizations is a core priority of the Department. This
core priority includes prosecution of business enterprises that unlawfully market and sell
marijuana. Accordingly, while the Department does not focus its limited resources on seriously
ill individuals who use marijuana as part ofa medically recommended treatment regimen in
compliance with state law as stated in the October 2009 Ogden Memorandum, we will enforce
the CSA vigorously against individuals and organizations that participate in unlawful
manufacturing and distribution activity involving marijuana, even if such activities are permitted
under state law. The Department's investigative and prosecutorial resources will continue to be
directed toward these objectives

Probably cause the part I bolded specifically states where obama intervened and that doesn't fit your narrative at all does it? or is it the narrative of the blogger that you blindly follow?

[jberryhill]

31. Yes, and I expect that "Toke Of The Town" coverage is objective

Just like those publications and news outlets about aspirin and other medicines.

[ReggieVeggie]

35. so first it was the criminal pot dispensary

now it's the biased reporting! You're 2 for 2!

[jberryhill]

39. I didn't say it was a criminal lot dispensary

I said you don't know why it was raided. Businesses that sell legal things can be raided for lots of reasons.

It's not "biased reporting" - it is an advocacy publication, for crying out loud. It is an agenda with which I agree, but my bias doesn't make me stupid.

[ReggieVeggie]

43. So, are you saying they're not telling the entire truth?

perhaps, just not reporting about any criminal activity the club might be involved with?

I know the DEA raided the place, the DEA, arm of the Attorney General, answerable to President Obama raided the place. PERIOD! If it was criminal activity on the part of the dispensary the DEA did not have to be there. That's what local and state police are for.

[jberryhill]

49. You need more capital letters and exclamation points

How would the paper know?

The thing about criminal activity is that you try not to tell reporters about it.

I don't know what the dispensary was or was not doing. I would bet that sometime in the future, a set of charges will be publically available. The dispensary will have the opportunity to respond to them, too. At that time, everyone will have a very clear answer to whether the raid solely arose from the federal marijuana prohibition, or whether the dispensary provided an excuse for a drug raid.

[Newest Reality]

7. This is an

unacceptable form of persecution and serves no useful purpose. Quite the contrary, it creates problems for viable solutions.

So, another check-mark on the reneged promises list of campaigner verses incumbent.

As always, the question is, is Obama deciding about this, or is he being advised, (or told) that this is the way it will be. One wonders what special interest might be influencing the jackboot approach in order to protect profits.

[felix_numinous]

8. It's too bad that Bernie Frank's HR 2835

Medical Marijuana Protection Act did not get passed in 2009. I wish it could be reintroduced, it would be a good start.

http://www.opencongress.org/bill/111-h2835/show

[jberryhill]

9. LA County law enforcement was involved

So, it may be that the dispensary was either not properly accounting or otherwise not following the law.

More facts are needed to know what went down here. The involvement of local law enforcement seems to be a clue that there was something other than the puzzler of finding one among zillions of dispensaries in LA.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Xicano]

13. Zen is the medical dispensary where I go

And I have NEVER seen anything remotely illegal going on there. Not to mention everyone who works there are very friendly and about as criminal looking or acting as some of the sweetest people you see on this forum - like CaliforniaPeggy for example.

[ReggieVeggie]

15. D E A

if it was a local issue the DEA would not have been there...OK Thanks

[Bluenorthwest]

19. And even in the city of Los Angeles, the number is capped at 70

Whttp://www.csmonitohttp://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0607/Los-Angeles-cuts-back-on-medical-marijuana-dispensariesr.com/USA/2010/0607/Los-Angeles-cuts-back-on-medical-marijuana-dispensaries

[Xicano]

26. Apparently You Don't Know How To Read.

"So, it may be that the dispensary was either not properly accounting or otherwise not following the law." --jberryhill

FAIL!


Did you not see the February 1st U.S. Attorney Melinda Haag memo posted in the OP? Its only in big bold letters.

[Egnever]

12. Riiight cause these places couldnt possibly be doing anything wrong

I would be willing to bet Obama doesnt even know this happened.

[Xicano]

16. Riiiight cause Obama would never go back on his word.

Wait. Oh yeah except for ALL those multitude of other broken promises.

n/t

[Bodhi BloodWave]

18. so aside from conspiracy and paranoia, what evidence IS there that Obama was involved in the raid?

[Xicano]

20. Is that the attitude you took when federal law enforcement did this while under Bush?

Nope, I bet it was a different tune then huh?

Look, it boils down to this: Obama SAID he wouldn't waste Depart of Justice resources on medical marijuana. If Obama kept his word federal law enforcement wouldn't be there. So, its plainly obvious he LIED! He lied because he's a fucking liar! Period! Accept it, you support a fucking liar and are trying to stick up for him. That's all there is to it, end of discussion.

[Egnever]

23. LOL

OK captain!

[Bodhi BloodWave]

28. *salutes and clicks his heels* aye aye sirrah , anything you say n/t

[ReggieVeggie]

32. so...no argument then

good job! and thanks for playing!

[Bodhi BloodWave]

33. why argue with somebody who is deaf, it holds no purpose and just wastes my time nt

[ReggieVeggie]

36. deaf to what? reality?

you ever think it might be you who is deaf?

[Bodhi BloodWave]

42. deaf in the sense that the poster has made up his mind and based on other posts

in this thread there would be no real chance to engage in a proper debate since in his mind he is correct and thats that, any arguments that does not conform with his reality is obviously wrong and as such useless.

Also I'd be tempted to say I have a different perspective being an outside observer(since I live in Norway), allowing me to see things in a more objective manner

[ReggieVeggie]

45. being Norwegian makes you objective?

how does that work, since you've clearly formed a definite opinion about a lot of things

[jberryhill]

55. Wait - an "objective person" never reaches a conclusion and forms an opinion?

I know a really bad lawyer who loses every case and then says that the judge wasn't impartial because the judge ruled against her.

Norwegians are famous for their objectivity.

[Bodhi BloodWave]

88. even objective people make decisions ya know

All I am saying is that since I am not directly involved it allows me a potentially more objective view of whats happening compared to somebody who is drab in the middle of it all, a.k.a outside view.

Also note, I said 'more objective' not that my view was perfectly objective, I am not arrogant enough to think that I am capable of being totally unbiased, some bias will always be involved no matter how much you try to rub it out.

[Xicano]

53. Looking at your avatar shows an inherent bias on your part.

I'm just saying... n/t

[Bodhi BloodWave]

87. thats laziness, was mostly meant for during the election.

Thanks for reminding me that I should change it since its a few years since the election and I haven't offered my avatar a moment's thought :p

How does the new one look?

[ReggieVeggie]

17. well, according to his strenuous followers

Obama doesn't know anything about what his Atty Gen does, so I guess he's covered

[Egnever]

21. LOL

You guys are a riot.

I would love to see you in Obamas job and then watch you melt into a quivering mass of flesh when you realized you couldnt possibly account for the actions of every department in your administration.


I think you dont have a clue what happened here other than some pot dispensory was raided with DEA assistance. You dont know why it was raided you dont know who initiated the raid basicly you dont know dick other than the headline but yet here you are spewing OBAMA LIED TO ME! in your ignorance.

The left is no different than the right when it comes to easily manipulated tools. Thanks for Standing up for blind outrage! You win the internets!

[ReggieVeggie]

24. So you don't think Bush should have been held accountable?

A D behind the name, find someone else to blame.

[Egnever]

25. I think you should know way more about a subject before you run around with your hair on fire

Screaming liar liar. Like I said above you don't know Dick about what happened here other than the headline. Yet here you are acting as though the DOJ is suddenly on some mission to raid all pot dispensaries.

You are comical in your openness to manipulation by any headline thrown your way.

[Xicano]

27. LOL That's because he IS a liar!

And it looks like you don't know how to read either. The below statement is in direct contrast with Obama's campaign promise.


Repost from the OP:

[ReggieVeggie]

29. comical is the slavish devotion to a cult of personality

I know plenty about the subject, thankyouverymuch, and other dispensaries in other states have been raided as well, all beyond the promise Obama made to stop the shit. SO, if Obama doesn't anything about these raids, does that make him incompetent?

[Egnever]

38. First off its federal law

Obama can not just overturn federal law any time he wishes. He did direct the doj to lay off medical marijuana. So your premise that he LIED about it is false.

http://blog.norml.org/2009/10/19/obama-administration-new-medical-marijuana-guidelines-are-issued/

Breaking News: President Obama Issues New Medical Marijuana Guidelines


In what can only be described as major departure in the so-called ‘war on drugs’, the Obama Administration is issuing a new three page memo this morning mapping out the federal government’s new guidelines for states that have laws protecting medical cannabis patients.

In February Attorney General Eric Holder indicated in a press conference that the Obama Administration–which favors physician-recommended access to medical cannabis–would abate from what had been an aggressive law enforcement (and propaganda) campaign against medical access to cannabis.

Today’s memo from the Department of Justice formalizes these changes and is a MAJOR victory for citizens who support cannabis law reform!

And the OP refers to an article that has to selectively edit a memo by a US attorney to make its case.

The op article states
Previous memos had indicated a loosening of federal prosecutions of medical marijuana; however the new memo states very clearly that the feds consider all dispensaries illegal under federal law and that their prosecution is a "core priority" of federal agents, according to the Cannabis Therapy Institute (CTI).


The actual memo however says this

"The prosecution of individuals and organizations involved in the trade of any illegal drugs
and the disruption of drug trafficking organizations is a core priority of the Department."

The article is manipulating you into thinking the DOJ is targeting dispensaries when the memo is actually addressing the legality of an Oakland law.

You can read the actual memo yourself here....http://www.cannabistherapyinstitute.com/legal/feds/doj.haag.memo.pdf

You are being manipulated if you go off the article in the OP You can not deny that. They have to selectively edit the memo to maker you believe the DOJ is now targeting dispensaries as one of its core goals. When in reality the memo states that its illegal drug trafficking they target. Yes dispensaries come under that heading as they are in violation of federal law but they are hardly the core target.

So I guess my question to you liar liar pants on fire is where is the Obama lie here? He did direct the DOJ to use its resources elsewhere. Again you have no clue why these two out of hundreds of dispensaries in california were raided.

What I know is I buy pot every couple of weeks from people who buy it from dispensaries in california. Its awesome that theres great quality pot available to me in a multitude of different varieties but its sure as hell not legal.

[ReggieVeggie]

40. It is legal in California

and Obama promised to stop going after dispensaries, which he has not done.

"The prosecution of individuals and organizations involved in the trade of any illegal drugs
and the disruption of drug trafficking organizations is a core priority of the Department."

You're comparing apples to apples here.

[Egnever]

48. Which has absolutely no effect on federal law

You are ignoring federal law and wheather you like it or not fedferal law is not affected by state law.

And I notice you convieneintly ignore the fact that your whole Obama lied premise was bullshit.


Once again you have no clue as to why these dispensories was raided and once again i will tell you I buy pot from california dispensories here in nevada every week from peoiple who have no medical reason to have it at all.

[Xicano]

68. Federal law? Oh yeah, you mean that NIXON law you're defending.

Ok, here's what your precious Nixon's federal law relies upon to claim constitutional jurisdiction. Its complete horse shit!

The constitutional jurisdiction of the Controlled Substance Act relies upon the interstate commerce clause. Here's the horse shit they're shoveling to make that claim.

Gonzales v. Raich

"...the regulation is squarely within Congress’ commerce power because production of the commodity meant for home consumption, be it wheat or marijuana, has a substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity."

--

"Given the enforcement difficulties that attend distinguishing between marijuana cultivated locally and marijuana grown elsewhere, 21 U.S.C. § 801(5), and concerns about diversion into illicit channels, the Court has no difficulty concluding that Congress had a rational basis for believing that failure to regulate the intrastate manufacture and possession of marijuana would leave a gaping hole in the CSA (Controlled Substance Act)."

"has a substantial effect on supply and demand in the national market for that commodity." :wtf:

National market? Really? What national market? Its suppose to be illegal, remember?


"concerns about diversion into illicit channels" :wtf:


So the Supreme Court is contradicting itself here. On one hand they are ruling that marijuana is illegal, but, on the other hand their statements infer that there's a LEGAL national market they have to protect from a black market. But then if there's a recognized legal market, then, its not illegal.

What a complete snow job. There's your precious Nixon's federal law claim of constitutionality.

[Egnever]

71. WTF I didnt say I agree with the law

That doesnt take away from the fact IT IS THE LAW.

I am all for changing it. But we havent done that yet and strangley enough its the DOJ's job to enforce the laws as they stand not as we would like them to stand.

Theres reality and fantasy land. Right now the law is reality and your position is somewhere in fantasy land where laws only aplly where you think they should.

Work to change the law! dont bitch about Obama lying (which he didnt) Direct your energies towards getting the law repealed instead of making up percieved transgressions from the president. You are pointing your IRE in the wrong place. Get on your congress critter make them change the fucking law dont just bitch cause law enforcement is doing its job.

[Xicano]

73. n/t

"That doesnt take away from the fact IT IS THE LAW."

[jberryhill]

74. +1

[jberryhill]

83. Nixon was on the supreme court?

Man, he really got around.

The things you learn on DU...

[Xicano]

84. LOL You're only displaying your ignorance at reading comprehension

Either that or you're showing yourself to have no credibility by having to resort to such a disingenuous statement.

Its plain as day I posted this is a Nixon law, and, that the SCOTUS has to shovel a pile of horse shit to make the claim this Nixon's law is constitutional.



You're just a joke, no need to bother with what you spew anymore.

:rofl:

[Romulox]

47. LULZ at the "Rogue Attorney General" theory.

DU is crying out for a meme generator.

[Egnever]

52. LOL at complete ignorance of the actual events

I posted above the memo that was selectively quoted for the OPs point. It wasn't a rogue attorney general it was a memo in response to a question of legality of an oakland law in the eyes of the federal government and after having to research it cause of tools crying foul theres no other way she could have worded that memo. Of course the person who wrote the article about it could have been honest about what it said but instead they picked a single phrase from the memo and ran a story totally misrepresenting the memo and its intent.


I agree it is crying out for a meme generator and low info voter springs immediately to mind.

[Romulox]

56. *You* are the one who suggested that the President "... couldnt possibly account for the actions"

*You* are the one who suggested that the President "... couldnt possibly account for the actions of every department in (his) administration." as a possible excuse for persecuting marijuana users.

Personally, I think that you would excuse any reason to persecute pot-heads. Because I think you simply have an authoritarian personality. I don't believe that the specific legal technicalities of the matter make one whit of difference to you; I think you'd always find an excuse for locking up men and women. Nor do I think that the specifics of the "crime" matter much.

Got you pegged, have I? :hi:

[Egnever]

60. I stand by that

And if you think he can and want to blame him for every memo some staffer sends out you're hopelessly naive.

Which is what at first apearance looked like what was going on here with all the Obama lied bull. Of course after further looking into it cause unlike you I dont just go with the headline I found that the whole OP article was completely misleading and that the memo referenced said no such thing.

So you can call me a psycophant as much as you like as long as I get to keep calling you an ignorant tool hell bent on obama bashing regardless of facts.

Got you pegged have I?

[Romulox]

62. I knew you would. Having a pocketful of excuses at the ready is what it's all about.

:yawn:

[Egnever]

65. So now facts are excuses

Yawn indeed

[pokerfan]

41. Broken promise...

or just something he said to get elected?

[Romulox]

46. What has attracted these crappy authoritarians to the Democratic *UNDERGROUND*?

:shrug:

[Occulus]

50. Good pay in an easy job where all you do is post online.

:D

[Romulox]

58. Where do I pick up my check??!??

:silly: ;)

[OnionPatch]

90. At the RNC Headquarters

:)

[Egnever]

54. Idiots who look no further than a headline?

:shrug:

[Romulox]

57. The whole mindset of "the default position is to *NOT* imprison people for a harmless crime" escapes

you.

That's why we can't "dialogue" on this matter. It's YOU who need to make a vigorous case for taking away people's freedom, if that's the side of the issue you choose to come down on. It's not on me (or private citizens) to prove that they shouldn't be locked up for not harming or bothering anybody. :hi:

[Egnever]

67. WTF?

We cant "dialogue" on this matter because we arent even having the same conversation.

You are off in some bizarro land where you think i said I support marijuana being ilegal or something . I have no idea where you get that idea as I smoke daily and have been for legalization for over 30 years.

My posts have all been about the ridiculous claims in this article that somehow Obama lied and is targeting dispensaries and I have give links in this thread to the actuall memo that was discused in the OP as well as Obamas directive to the DOJ that it should not focus on medical marijuana.

You however seem to think that no matter what the law is you should only aply it when it suits you.

So lets recap shall we?

1)I am for legal marijuana after 30 years of smoking it I would love to be able to just walk into a smoke shop anmd get some instead of having to deal with some of the shady idiots i have had to deal with over the years.

2) The OP is bullshit. Not only dont we know why these two dispensaries were raided yet but the articles selectively quote to manipulate you into believing something that is not true.

3) Obama did not lie despite the OP claims he did dierect the doj to lay off dispensaries.

4) You havent proved anything other than you are great at pontificating. Not only that but you make up arguments that dont exists and then claim foul.

Enjoy your evening. You will excuse me while I stop taking you seriously from here on.

[Romulox]

72. What a lame schtick: to come out all guns blazing in favor of Drug Warriors, then

pull this : "It's OK that I support imprisoning people for a victimless crime: I smoke pot!" card as if it excuses everything?

Get this: I don't give a fuck what you smoke. If you support the War on the Drugs (and that includes manufacturing pathetic rationalizations for every promise broken,) then YOU are part of the problem, full stop.

As if narcs don't smoke pot. :hi:

[Egnever]

77. Wow you are one confused individual

No where am I supporting imprisoning people for a victimless crime. I am here railing against FUD IE OBAMA LIED!

He did not lie and again you have no idea why this dispensary was raided though I would be willing to bet they weren't complying with California law.

Pot should be legal period end of story but the fact remains that it is not. Dispensaries should all comply with the law as it stands but they are not. Till the law is changed as it should be we have to deal with what is not what we wish it would be and ruining around screaming betrayal where none exists makes you look like a dumb ass and not only that undermines the cause you supposedly support by making YOU look like a liar and by undermining the people who are trying to work to wards the goals you supposedly support.

You want to put up a post about people being imprisoned for victimless crimes I'll jump on your bandwagon but when you want to cheer complete bullshit posts you better believe I'll jump in and call you on it when I see it.

So once again.. The premise of the OP that Obama is breaking a campaign promise with this raid IS utter garbage. Also the part where it pretends that Obama issued a memo targeting dispensaries is also utter garbage. I posted links disproving both of those idiocies.

It may not fit into your narrative that Obama is the devil but that doesn't by any means equate to me supporting jailing people for victimless crimes.

[krabigirl]

63. Who knows? It is frightening.

[Fly by night]

86. The "drug worriers" are worried that they will lose their fat paychecks and the opportunity ...

... to ride around in confiscated vehicles with BIG guns strapped to their waists (to compensate for the lack of any collateral in their pants) and terrorize the citizenry while conducting no-holds-barred armed robbery and land piracy to make the world safe for oxycontin.

For a certain strain of Neanderthal, that must engender much fear. Hence, those few of them who can actually type show up here to run pretzel logic circles around any pro-cannabis thread.

Sad, but true.

[wildbilln864]

61. k&r! nt

[krabigirl]

64. Yep, he broke that promise a while back.

[Egnever]

69. No he didnt

Dont be a tool. Straight from Normls mouth


http://blog.norml.org/2009/10/19/obama-administration-new-medical-marijuana-guidelines-are-issued/

In what can only be described as major departure in the so-called ‘war on drugs’, the Obama Administration is issuing a new three page memo this morning mapping out the federal government’s new guidelines for states that have laws protecting medical cannabis patients.

In February Attorney General Eric Holder indicated in a press conference that the Obama Administration–which favors physician-recommended access to medical cannabis–would abate from what had been an aggressive law enforcement (and propaganda) campaign against medical access to cannabis.

[GodlessBiker]

91. That article is a year and a half old.

[Ramulux]

66. Whats really fucked up

is that a lot of dispensaries I have been to, have this poster of Obama and a quote of his saying that he doesn't think the federal government should be raiding dispensaries.

I bet a lot of dispensary owners are feeling pretty foolish right about now.

[Egnever]

70. Are you purposely dense?

This is from NORML it doesnt get any more pro pot than them.

http://blog.norml.org/2009/10/19/obama-administration-new-medical-marijuana-guidelines-are-issued/

In what can only be described as major departure in the so-called ‘war on drugs’, the Obama Administration is issuing a new three page memo this morning mapping out the federal government’s new guidelines for states that have laws protecting medical cannabis patients.

In February Attorney General Eric Holder indicated in a press conference that the Obama Administration–which favors physician-recommended access to medical cannabis–would abate from what had been an aggressive law enforcement (and propaganda) campaign against medical access to cannabis.

[jberryhill]

76. You don't understand

Obama hates women, gays, labor, and apparently legal marijuana.

Rest assured, just about everything Democrats favor - Obama hates it.

And even if Obama is relatively competent at the job he was elected to do, I guarantee you that if you are a single issue liberal voter, then Obama absolutely hates anyone who agrees with you on that issue.

Just tell me what matters most to you, and I'll tell you how Obama is out to get you, specifically.

[U4ikLefty]

82. "relatively competent" seems an over-reach in this instance. nt

[U4ikLefty]

75. I repeat my Bu$h rule. If Bu$h did this, would you be for/against it?

That my shed some light.

[Egnever]

78. Did what exactly?

[U4ikLefty]

80. Lied.

BTW, how about using a source fom NORML that isn't from 2009?

[Name removed]

81. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Egnever]

85. So cause he did it in 2009 it didnt happen?

[U4ikLefty]

94. I see, your personal attack gets deleted so you repeat the same thing

only without the insult.

Your agenda is showing.

[Egnever]

95. Yea the truth bothers you doesnt it?

Doesnt fit into the bash obama narative you have built up. Talk about agendas!

[U4ikLefty]

97. No, LIES and personal attacks bother me.

Those who read this will decide who has the agenda.

[Egnever]

98. Works for me seeing as how you have added nothing

except baseless attacks on the president. Or do you think you can actually back up your ridiculous claims?

[Le Taz Hot]

89. Oh, that's gonna win him LOTS of friends in California.

Does he not get that the fastest rising category in voter registration in California is "Decline to State?" Why do you think that is? People are sick of BOTH political parties and this illustrates exactly why. And the banksters STILL roam free.

[somone]

92. The die was cast when he picked Biden and Emanuel

Both were well-known drug-war enthusiasts

[Buddyblazon]

93. This doesn't sound terribly accurate

Here in Colorado we were told that if you were involved in MMJ you were fine as long as you followed state law. Break the state law and most likely the feds would become involved.

And that is in fact pretty much what we've seen. The cops don't care (I work with several off-duty officers at my place of employment).

But other than one jackass that went on TV to do an interview about what he was calling a "legal grow" but was in fact WAY WAY over in his count (any idiot could have figured that out from listening to his interview), there hasn't been any issues with the feds.

As of yet and as of that memo, we have seen zero crack down.

[ReggieVeggie]

96. but it's a state law

why would the feds need to be involved? If a dispensary, open under legal local and state guidlines, were to violate those laws, what would the feds be needed for?

[pokerfan]

99. Because it remains illegal under federal law

As a result, medical marijuana remains completely illegal under current federal law. The DEA has raided scores of medical marijuana growers, clubs and caregivers in California since the enactment of Prop. 215. For the most part, the targets have been either high-profile activists who have attracted publicity, or commercial-scale dispensaries and growers whom local law enforcement has decided to turn over for federal prosecution. Defendants in federal cases are not allowed to invoke state law or medical marijuana as a defense. As a result, every medical marijuana defendant who has gone to trial in federal court has been convicted. Sentences have ranged from one day to 20 years. Summary of federal cases.

http://www.canorml.org/prop/collectivetips.html#federal

This is what makes Obama's reversal so frustrating.