Marijuana Users Not High Priority

So says President Obama to Barbara Walters.

Marijuana Users Not High Priority for President Obama

President Obama says recreational users of marijuana in states that have legalized the substance should not be a “top priority” of federal law enforcement officials prosecuting the war on drugs.

“We’ve got bigger fish to fry,” Obama said of pot users in Colorado and Washington during an exclusive interview with ABC News’ Barbara Walters.

“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,” he said, invoking the same approach taken toward users of medicinal marijuana in 18 states where it’s legal.

So after a month, the President comes out and says… absolutely nothing.

After all, feds going after users has never been a top priority, because they don’t have the resources to go after that many users. But this says absolutely nothing about distribution methods, or even the possibility of going after some users (it just wouldn’t be a “top priority”).

Now, politically, he could have stated this exact non-policy in several different ways, and they way he stated it is at least positive.

The other thing I kind of liked was one word used here:

“This is a tough problem, because Congress has not yet changed the law,” Obama said. “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?”

The word is “yet.” That’s an interesting signal.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

142 Responses to Marijuana Users Not High Priority

  1. Chris says:

    I’m almost taking for granted that this will be dragged out for as long as possible (a fun trainwreck to watch, no doubt), but the thought of congress actually doing something useful is an interesting one.

    • DonDig says:

      It may well drag out for a long time, and I agree that it is time for Congress to get on the ball and right this wrong, (and many others), but it sure is better than him saying, ‘We’re going to fight this tooth and nail until it is overturned and rationality is restored to those impudent states.’
      That would have been a disaster to look forward to. This evolution will take time, but it’s progressive and welcomed in my mind at least.

  2. Matthew Meyer says:

    It was also a bit encouraging to see him quoted as saying he doesn’t support legalization “at this time”–a temporal qualifier I’ve not seen His Choomliness use before.

    • B. Snow says:

      I’m actually very encouraged by that wording = “at this point” that’s very similar to the way he talked about his ‘personal view’ on same-sex marriage as “evolving”.
      Although, I wouldn’t bet on Biden, “getting out ahead of his skis” on this like he did with speaking out publicly in favor of marriage equality (That helped the President have some “political cover” & and added some pressure from the Democratic “base”). But, he might = I wouldn’t rule it out -> look at LEAP, there’s no better spokesperson for policy change than one who changes their own ‘long held stance’ after seeing their previously preferred policy – outright, hands-down FAIL – over a couple decades in Biden’s case.

      In regard to this sort of “Social Issue” – it’s recently experienced a very similar “shifting public opinion” regarding it = as demonstrated by voters in state Ballot Initiatives in the Nov. Elections, so it’s reasonably so think people’s views are open to persuasion/change.

      Example: The huge shift in public opinion of the African-American community on marriage equality = after the President changed his stance on it!

      Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, helped ‘nudge’ the administration on that one too = answering a direct question about it on ‘Meet the Press’… Pres. Obama may not have been too happy about Biden & Duncan speaking out publicly on the issue before he was ready to do so.

      OR, you could take the cynical(?) view that he knew they were going to make those statements, or maybe that he had some level of anxiety about it when it “made news”; But was relieved – when it worked out well politically, in the majority of the public opinion as a whole…
      And most people know both of these social issues have shared similar percentages of approval in the polls – especially in the last few/recent months!

      Looking at the story on the abc site:

      ” Obama told Walters he does not – “at this point” – support widespread legalization of marijuana. But he cited shifting public opinion and limited government resources as reasons to find a middle ground on punishing use of the drug.

      “This is a tough problem, because Congress has not yet changed the law,” Obama said. “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?”

      The president said he has asked Attorney General Eric Holder and the Justice Department to examine the legal questions surrounding conflicting state and federal laws on drugs.

      “There are a number of issues that have to be considered, among them the impact that drug usage has on young people, [and] we have treaty obligations with nations outside the United States,” Holder said Wednesday of the review underway.

      Re-reading that,
      “”This is a tough problem, because Congress has not yet changed the law,” to ME that seems/looks like he’s already “read the tea leaves” and knows it will change – just not how soon.
      ALSO, another the bit left out of several re-reports on news aggregater sites:

      Quote: “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?”

      In my view he’s telegraphing a desire to see a “progressive” change in this law, AND hinting that they could decide to approach it the way they they’re doing with DOMA – not defending challenges to it by the states…

      The same could apply here = By them challenging state laws & as noted in the article (in a vague way – but IMHO obvious if you’re familiar with the subject) the AG Eric Holder is going to have to get us out of the “1961 Single Convention Treaty” (and ‘supplementary treaties’ in 1971 &1988) = which is plausible.

      (Due to a number of details in the treaty = “the Single Convention is not self-executing, Parties must pass laws to carry out its provisions.” and wording like

      “Subject to its constitutional limitations, each Party shall . . .”

      *This notion has been raised before*, if Cannabis Prohibition was ruled unconstitutional = that could be a way out. It might ‘force’ some to eat some crow regarding the treaties – but that may be easier where the politicians that signed them are long gone.
      Another thing to note in this regard – our best support is likely the many member-nations of the UN that want little or nothing to do drug prohibition = in Europe, and recent political views in Central & South America!

      • Windy says:

        Quote: “I head up the executive branch; we’re supposed to be carrying out laws.”
        Oh yeah? He says that after doing end runs around both congress and the Constitution frequently over the past 4 years, via EOs?

      • darkcycle says:

        I sure hope you’re right. I’m not ready to read that much into what he didn’t say, though. I don’t buy the “eleventy-dimension chess” aspect. I see an administration that is simply confused.
        I think they saw their job in the drug war as simply tending the cows for their masters. Somehow the gate got left open and all the cows wandered out.

      • damaged justice says:

        “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?”

        By reading the Ninth Amendment, you illiterate tyrant.

        • Windy says:

          And the 10th.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          I think the 14th Amendment is important here as well. I can consider the argument that a law against a dangerous substance could be legitimate but if a particular substance like drinking alcohol is legal it’s a violation of our right to equal protection to make a demonstrably safer substance illegal.

  3. stlgonzo says:

    His comments are disingenuous. He could reschedule Cannabis any time he wants. He is the head of the DEA.

    • allan says:

      I was thinking about the CSA yesterday… “Controlled” Substances Act is absurd when the substances listed are anything but (or the least) controlled.

      • War Vet says:

        The U.N. Single Convention allows hemp. The U.N. Single Convention trumps the CSA law. But Hemp is a schedule one drug in America and we allow Canada to grow it (while allowing our DEA in there as well, thus meaning Canada is disobeying American Federal Law) and export it to the U.S. (which logically makes Canada a Narco-State since the Canadian governement allows and profits off the selling of a schedule one drug to the U.S. in the form of socks and clothing etc). Because the CSA labels socks and houses (and all hemp material) as schedule one drugs, doesn’t this make our police and politicans insane since cops and our dear VP sincerly beleive people smoke their socks (based on legal actions and not personal beliefs) and roves etc . . . isn’t obeying the CSA law an admitance to insanity (based on the hemp reasoning) and if they are insane, shoudln’t we simply fire all the police and politicans and give the jobs to a new group of people due to the fact you really don’t want someone who thinks people get stoned off of paper or carpet to have access to a badge or gavel. But then again, good Kush or Mexican Red is the exact same thing as .5%THC hemp, due to the fact its seeds and fibres can be used in industry (and not just for toking up), thus meaning the U.N. ban on Canabis as non-void since it clearly states in laymen terms: something that is illegal is not illegal. Writing drug laws in America (or the world) appears to be akin to drunk texting or dialing (I didn’t call you, Vodka did).

  4. divadab says:

    In Washington State, farm organizations are actually discussing “pot tourism”, in a very jokey-mocky way (these are VERY conservative people), but the process is well under way. And one thing that unites people of all political colors in WA is pride in how the State does things and resistance to outside interference.

    Washington State runs its entire operations on sales and excise taxes (and user fees) – no income tax – and so efficiency is necessary and expected of the State government. And putting cannabis business into the formal (taxed) economy and out of the underground (untaxed) economy makes sense to most fiscally prudent people in the State. That is how I-502 was passed by the people of the State, IMHO – it’s simply practical to replace enforcement expenses and replace them with sales tax revenues.

    Now, the feds can print money (the State can’t) and they are to the tune of 35% more than they are taking in in tax revenues. This is a structural disincentive to change their ways – and so change at the federal level will take longer. But it will happen, and its gratifying to see the most timid and cautious President actually open the door a crack.

    • Windy says:

      I’d rather see the State cut spending and costs than rely on cannabis to bring in more revenue (that they will just spend as fast as it comes in and then some).

      • TINMA says:

        Oh yes, it will be spent, but that doesnt stop us from pointing out how much they will “save” by not incarcerating cannabis consumers, let alone any taxes gathered from the sale of cannabis.

        Gotta pick those bricks up and throw them back at the wall when ever possible.

      • divadab says:

        What are you suggesting they cut, Windy? Eliminate Basic Health entirely instead of just not allowing new members? Increase class sizes more by firing teachers or not hiring new ones? The State is running pretty lean right now.

        I do agree that the tax rates in I-502 are ridiculously high. I guess that’s what the proponents thought would get the pols on board!

        I’d be happy if legal cannabis sales were taxed like all retail sales, at retail sales tax rates. And that’s how I think it will shake out ultimately. I mean, why not tax cannabis just like prozac or tobacco or beer?

        • Windy says:

          diva, I didn’t mean to suggest they should not tax marijuana, tho I agree the level should be the same as other retail products. And what I think the State should cut is the administrative levels. There are way too many upper and middle management with too high salaries and not much to do except shuffle papers (or leaning on shovels on roadways and construction sites) and steal money from taxpayers. Have you checked the parking lots at city and county schools, lately, or especially the administrative building at the old Roeder school on Dupont? Filled to the brim and overflowing into other nearby parking lots. It is the same at every State office (also in the city, tho I don’t have any real stake in that, since I live outside the city and visit it as seldom as possible, usually just to drive through, stop at Super Supplements once a week, to pay my taxes twice a year and to drop off my vote in elections, I seldom even use the post office anymore).

        • divadab says:

          Windy – I feel your pain. I grew up in a town where you would see the town manager driving a snowplow – he had too much work to do to waste time sitting in his office! And too many of our current government people think their job is to hire people to do the actual, you know, work.

          But Washington State is actually comparatively efficient – we are about 40th in the nation in spending per student. And much much higher rank in student achievement. There are probably efficiencies that could be wrung out of the system, but I generally don’t mind paying my sales taxes because I know they are used to pay for local services, mostly for the young people who will be working and paying taxes when I’m old and decrepit.

  5. Peter says:

    Alternet has a summary of 2012, something of an Annus Mirabilis for drug reformers and a nightmare for prohibitionist.
    “We are at a paradoxical moment in our country. We are clearly moving in the right direction, toward a more rational drug policy based on science, compassion, health and human rights. But we need to step up our efforts, grow our numbers, and continue to win hearts and minds because the casualties from the war continue to mount every day. If the people lead, the leaders will follow.”

    This year’s groundbreaking events no doubt meant that Obama was unable to avoid Walters’ questions on cannabis reform as a condition for doing this folksy “joint” interview with Michelle, and instead had to dissemble about “bigger fish” and try to avoid tripping himself up. As a result he just reveals his weakness and hypocrisy.

  6. allan says:

    More of Barbara Walters’ exclusive first joint, post-election interview with President Obama and first lady Michelle Obama airs tonight on “20/20” at 10 p.m. ET on ABC stations.

    • Peter says:

      “But [Obama] cited shifting public opinion and limited government resources as reasons to find a middle ground on punishing use of the drug.”

      I smell Kev’s moderate/middle approach (more of the same for as long as we can get away with it)

  7. muggles420 says:

    I too, take the ‘yet’ as an indication….but he, of course is passing the ball….”congress has not yet”. Now we have known for a long time that the 1971 Congress dropped the ball too when they placed cannabis in schedule 1 until the recieved futher evidence…..which came in the Shaffer Report….to de-criminal….anyway, Congress has never really picked the ball back up… license to drug warmongers.

  8. Dante says:


    More of the same BS. He talks the talk, but will not walk the walk. Wouldn’t be prudent, there’s too much money in it (for drug warriors).

    You cannot convince an American politician to derail his own gravy train. They simply lack the character necessary to serve any person or purpose other than themselves.

  9. Jose says:

    Bigger fish to fry? Obviously not if the fish is too big. They had a chance to fry a whale with HSBC. Just when I thought their hypocrisy could not become more epic…

    • darkcycle says:

      Yeah, he wants the big fish swimming free. ‘Cause he’s the remora eating their scraps and cleaning their parasites away.

  10. Servetus says:

    Any attempt by Obama or his successors to pass the buck on marijuana will be spit back like some counterfeit $20-bill in a vending machine.

    Fixing the U.S. congress, judiciary and the executive branches so they’re functional and capable of ridding the world of one of its great crimes against humanity is a daunting task. Corrupt and incompetent government is only one part of the problem. While politicians flounder over the issues, and while many Republicans now risk getting voted out of office for being anti-pot, other groups responsible for influencing or encouraging the drug war are getting a free pass.

    I’m speaking of religious groups that include the Vatican, which views illicit drug use, or getting high, to be a sin. Five Supreme Court judges are Catholics, and it’s no secret to anyone that these justices tend to base legal decisions involving social and cultural issues on Catholic canon law instead of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

    A clarification from the Vatican on how a humane government should deal with sins like drug use would be helpful, but anytime the Church is confronted with the drug war, they simply fall back on their sovereign signatory role with regard to the Single Treaty. It’s this kind of moral laziness that got them into trouble when they first collaborated with the Nazis. Hitler, BTW, was so charmed by the intolerance of canon law that as a choir boy he once entertained the idea of entering the priesthood.

    No one really wants to be caught holding the body-bag once the drug war is finally dead. And that gives the legalization movement a tremendous leverage.

    Forcing non-governmental authorities to speak out now on the drug enforcement issue is critical. The Vatican and other church leaders can’t afford any more scandals. The country is trending away from religion, and any cheerleading by the religious elite for tyrannies such as drug enforcement is going to widen that trend. Religious leaders have a clear choice of exhibiting prescience, or succumbing to defeat and extinction. It’s their call.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      Huh, I was born a Catholic and I think that the Pope would laugh out loud if someone suggested that I made my decisions based on Catholic dogma. It’s not unlikely that he might know my name because I write every year telling him that I should be excommunicated for the good of the Church. But catch-22 is alive and thriving in Vatican City. They won’t excommunicate you if you want that.

      It’s a mistake to believe that Catholics walk in lockstep and/or speak with one voice.

      • Servetus says:

        Yes, I know Catholics don’t necessarily follow Vatican dogma. Contraceptives use by Catholics is proof of that. The distance between Catholics and the Vatican has never been greater. It’s just that there’s the possibility that an official recognition by the Vatican alone indicating the drug war is a disaster could let a few congressional and juridical leaders off the official hook. Any high ranking denunciation would be a good thing at this point.

  11. allan says:

    a common sentiment on Obama (well, common to over 1 million people) expressed this morn by my friend DanK, don’t blame me, I voted for Gary Johnson.

    • B. Snow says:

      So did I… and AFAIK = I would’ve been perfectly happy with Gary Johnson as President.
      But, given where I live in Texas – I could easily vote for him without worrying that I would’ve been even partly to blame for the election of a “President Mitt”… *shiver*
      Well, okay then = I now know – that idea STILL makes my skin crawl!

      Am I the only one here that doesn’t feel ‘oppressed’ or threatened by President Obama?

      Looking at the news I’m just hoping he doesn’t cave on “gun control” – hopefully they limit anything new in that area to, maybe putting in more thorough background checks?
      I know that for law-makers with a grip on reality = the idea of trying to make ALL gun sales require a background check (person-to-person) is just as pie-in-the-sky as Prohibition, there’s simply NO way to even begin to enforce that sort of law either.

      • claygooding says:

        Seymour B Snow,,we have a lot of work ahead of us,,

      • Duncan20903 says:


        Gun control? I think it’s a shame that the school principal wasn’t strapped. I’m concentrating more on hoping that the fuckwad doesn’t have any cannabis metabolites floating around in his urine.

        • Peter says:

          yeah the kids should be packing too

        • claygooding says:

          the only problem with gun laws is that law abiding citizens don’t need them and criminals don’t read laws

        • Plant Down Babylon says:

          The teachers should have been packing too!
          These kind of things happen in a free society. It just depends on how/what influences said society while they’re growing up and how much respect for human life they have.

        • TINMA says:

          Oh you can bet if he has any weed in his system, government and media will beat that to death, revive it, beat it some more.

        • stlgonzo says:

          “I’m concentrating more on hoping that the fuckwad doesn’t have any cannabis metabolites floating around in his urine.”

          Duncan, I with ya, but if all of the anti-pot ads I’ve seen from the ONDCP tell me anything it is that pot would make me sink into the couch and not have the motivation to do something like this.

      • Windy says:

        B. Snow, more thorough background checks would not have prevented today’s tragedy, the kid killed his mother in her home and took (stole) her legally obtained guns to go on his rampage against those she loved, her students. Greater gun control will never stop these incidents, they will only make it even more likely that when something like this does occur, there will be no one who is legally armed and able to take out the shooter before he has a chance to kill more than one or two. Ever notice how all these incidents happen in “gun free zones”? There is a logical reason for that: no one will be free or able to shoot back.

        Clay, even if they do read them they won’t obey them, that is what makes them criminals.

        • Freeman says:

          Greater gun control will never stop these incidents, they will only make it even more likely that when something like this does occur, there will be no one who is legally armed and able to take out the shooter before he has a chance to kill more than one or two.

          How many more mass shootings will it take before we see JUST ONE example of this. It’s a nice theory that so far just hasn’t worked out in practice at all.

          Now that is not to say that banning guns is any kind of solution. Much like drug abuse, weapons abuse is the kind of problem where the obvious solutions will only make things worse. The first half of your statement is absolutely true. The second half appears to be fantasy. Until we can point to examples, it is a weak argument against gun control.

          We responded to Columbine by placing armed police in our high schools and middle schools. Looks like grade schools will be next. Not a perfect solution, but I doubt one exists.

        • stlgonzo says:

          It has happened but they don’t make the news because they don’t fit the gun control narrative.

        • Freeman says:


          While it’s not clear that the murderer in your example was intent on further mayhem if he hadn’t been subdued by armed bystanders after leaving the building where he committed his crimes, I’ll concede the point anyway. After spending the better part of the day discussing and contemplating the issue, I’ve come to the conclusion that training and arming public school faculty in sufficient numbers to provide effective immediate emergency defensive response at each facility would be the best way to defend against this sort of attack. Like Plant Down Babylon said, the teachers should have been packing too.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          It’s disingenuous to ask for examples of law abiding citizens standing up to an armed thug when the law is such that law abiding citizens aren’t allowed to carry guns.

          No guns involved but what about United Airlines flight #93 on 9/11/2001?

        • Freeman says:

          Duncan, you’re right of course. I didn’t intend to come off like I was expecting an answer, and I agree it would be unfair to demand one.

          Train and arm some of the faculty in each school and we’d either see the example I was asking about or we wouldn’t see school shootings any more because they’re no longer a soft enough target to attract the sort of cowards who do this sort of thing.

        • Windy says:

          Freeman, according to the National Safety Council, with guns being used 2.5 million times a year in self defense against criminals, firearms are actually used more than 80 times more often to protect lives, rather than to take lives.

        • Freeman says:

          Good information Windy. Thanks for that.

  12. Peter says:

    with the news of the ct school shooting, how long will it be before the media’s “shooter used mj” slurs begin?

    • claygooding says:

      put marijuana news in your search bar and the news article about it shows up,,and not a word in the article about marijuana or drugs I could find.
      media spin?

  13. Tony Aroma says:

    Aside from the fact that he is basically saying the same thing he’s been saying all along about medical mj, he’s lying about this being something for the Legislative Branch to handle. Or he’s passing the buck. The DEA is Executive Branch, as is the Attorney General and Justice Department. The Controlled Substances Act grants power to schedule substances to the AG, who has delegated that power to the DEA. So in this unusual case, the Executive Branch both makes and enforces the law. Saying he has to wait for Congress to act is just not true.

    As far as I’m concerned, the president’s comments suggest things are going to continue on as they have been: saying they’ll only go after state law violators, and in reality continuing the raids and property forfeitures against anybody and everybody. But at least Obama will leave a legacy as the last, great drug warrior. Too bad he’ll end up being on the wrong side of history, much like the supporters of slavery prior to the Civil War.

  14. Bigger fish to fry?! I guess then he considers the 800,000+ folks he tosses into the criminal justice sysyem every year for the simple possession of pot are just guppies…

    • Freeman says:

      Perhaps he should consider how those 800,000 potheads per year are likely to vote before the state labels them felons, taking away their voting rights.

  15. claygooding says:

    It doesn’t matter if the feds bust commercial producers and distributors in WA and CO as far as our efforts to end prohibition is concerned,,he ended it when he answered the feds wouldn’t be persecuting citizens for possession or personal grows in states where the people have legalized it’s use.

    Now to make sure any new states voting on legalization allows personal grows and it will not matter if the state never makes a dime in sales tax,,as long as you can grow your own and never sell any to anyone the feds and your local police should never darken your door because someone smells pot.

    • Matthew Meyer says:

      I don’t believe Obama mentioned personal grows, but all the same, I think the Colorado amendment seals the deal by allowing home growing.

    • claygooding says:

      Don’t want to give the impression all is over,,hemp is still a long ways from being freed and sadly as this is unfolding it will be years before we get the prohibition of hemp lifted if we ever do.

      They are trying to keep enough restrictions on marijuana production to keep it indoors and until we remove a bunch more propaganda from the sheeples minds it will be.

      • claygooding says:

        President Obama and AG Holder have set the legalization framework,,the feds cannot/will not enforce possession laws,,keep “in public” possession limits small enough to discourage black market activity,,,over the limit and jail will be your next stop,,personal grows limited for the same reason and below federal radar,,way below,,feds don’t target under 100 plants according to all the evidence I have found on it,,if anyone has different data please post.

        The biggest problem people trying to sell marijuana for a living will be the traffic required to sell sufficient product to customers that will only want the legal limit,,,without police busting every one available when they smell pot it will give them the time and resources to follow the traffic and make “dealing” a dangerous game.

        I don’t think the government is going to end prohibition of hemp,,and this is their plan to keep that ban in place,,no large outdoor production of marijuana keeps hemp banned,,,that is how I see it Vern. This is still only a delaying tactic that Mary Jane and knowledge will over turn even this,,,we still have a long ways to go but they just lost this game. [wave]

        • Matthew Meyer says:

          Hell, the feds’ leaked memo says their threshold is closer to 1000 plants.

          But tell that to Dale Schafer and Mollie Fry, whose 30-plant grows were tallied for a few years to reach the 99-plant mandatory minimum threshold.

          They’ll go after you if they want to, is the bottom line.

        • claygooding says:

          That part is true,,but with thousands/millions of personal grows and every one that is legal demanding jury trials,,how long until nullification’s and hung juries grid locks the federal justice system?

    • darkcycle says:

      He did NOT say he wouldn’t be busting citizens for personal possession, he said it was not a priority. That’s exactly what he said about dispensaries in the Ogden Memo, and look what happened. But, that being said, they have lost personal possession none the less, simply because Federal L.E. are not the ones who are making contact with the public on a regular basis. Not only do they not respond to bar fights and loud music calls, they don’t have the personnel to do so. The odds o’ being in contact with a federal L.E.O. are pretty slim overall.

      • claygooding says:

        there is one part everyone forgets,,they also have not busted any patients or patients growing just their own medicine,,tmk and according to the reports and info I can find the feds don’t bust 6 plant grows.

        They also said they wouldn’t bust any persons complacent with state law,,are the disp complacent?

        • Matthew Meyer says:

          I think you mean recently, because the case involving Angel Raich and Diane Monson had feds at Monson’s Oroville residence uprooting exactly 6 plants, if I remember aright.

        • claygooding says:

          Mathew,,isn’t that pre-memo? There were people put in prison for life for 1 joint at one time,,

        • Matthew Meyer says:

          Pre-memo, yes, Clay. Point taken.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          I’ve seen a couple of incidents in Maine within the last several months. It appears to me that the MDEA is conspiring with the Feds because growing less than 100 plants is a misdemeanor under Maine criminal law.

      • claygooding says:

        “”Not only do they not respond to bar fights and loud music calls, they don’t have the personnel to do so.””

        I thought there were some with the secret service in the bar in Bogota,,oops,,that would be causing the disturbance call.

  16. CJ says:

    hi guys. i know ive not said anything about it but i mean, obviously just like everyone else i too have been very eager to see what the fallout would be over the state initiatives. Been very eager to see this all play out just like everybody else. So, I just found out about Obama’s comments on a different site, out of respect for Pete and everybody im not about to advertise it but its a community of pretty much only opiate users. Anyhow I found out over there and came here straight away to see if it had spread yet and I see it has and I really hope that its sincere. I am happy for folks out there who can truly see this unbelievable historic moment.

    Really I think if I were a marijuana lover and avid marijuana legalization reformist, I swear to God I try putting myself in someone’s shoes who feels as I do about heroin about pot and I have to say, I am not much good at role playing but I kind of get the idea and it is just an overwhelming feeling – I would imagine a person would feel a mix of euphoria and like, so much so that you want to cry.. I do know what that’s like actually, I remember one time when prohibition really kicked my tooshy wooshy super duper bad I mean really really ultra bad guys and I was sick for a month plus and broke and starving and frozen in the fetal position. I can’t remember how but somehow a good amount of opiates were purchased and entered my blood stream and I recall very vividly my forehead on the ground, I must have looked like a peasant bowing before the shogun or a muslim at noon praying towards mecca. In that position I sobbed and sobbed so happy to feel my heroine’s sweet embrace but I just remember maybe for a good 10 minutes i just sobbed in that position and thanked the opiate God’s above, literally sobbing out loud the words “thank you thank you thank you thank you” I think it was quite possibly one of the most, simultaneously, humblest, happiest, moments of my life. I truly think that a genuinely passionate marijuana advocate must have something like that going on. I can only imagine. It must be a positively sensational feeling of triumph –

    in these pathetic times of the disgusting creature known as the hipster who has Che Guevera’s face tattooed on his bosom but is probably the biggest coward of all subcultures, there is such transparent talk about revolution. I mean, from what I’ve learned about prohibition, there are some incredibly powerful and incredibly evil people/organizations that will stop at nothing, much like the terminator in that movie, to keep this drug war going. I remember Pete putting up an article once, I believe it was him at this site where I dont remember if it was GEO Group or what prison industry group they released this letter thing that basically was talking to some type of governor or official they were trying to seduce/jump in the bed with and like the letter talked about how lax drug laws basically would screw up their business (the business of locking people up) its not just the prison industrial complex but the DEA, judges, cops, narc cops, narcs in general (the bastards that get paid to snitch good honest drug lovers like us out) and its like, make no mistake these bastards all profit at the expense of someone elses pain, whole families misery, just so much down right evil. Right? Now to fully and completely destroy them would mean to legalize drugs. No doubt, as is often said about legalizing weed that it would hurt cartels well it also hurts the evil bastards like the private prison business, the DEA etc. I mean, to be apart of marijuana reform and to see this, it is just phenominal – I mean, its time like this when it seems that english fails me in that no words can truly express the glory and greatness and wonderful aspects of this, of whats been done.

    I think about friends of mine, so many, too many, who’ve passed away thanks to prohibition. I think about all those drug war victims and it’s just, it can become somewhat overwhelming – I mean, its sad enough to think that there are fellow human beings, fellow countrymen, people out there involved in these evil organizations that do so much harm and persecute us, but its like, the victims too that they’ve victimized, i think about them and how I wish they could see whats happened now. I hope it’s the beginning but I definitely wanted to say a sort of wow and congratulations

    but I also wanted to say this, and I’m sorry, I don’t want to spoil anybodies mood but if I may, I wouldn’t be me if I didn’t add this. When I read Obama’s comments about “bigger fish to fry” or whatever, I immediately thought “oh hell, what the hell is that supposed to mean, Obama?! Great! just great, colorado and Washington junkies better run like the f’n wind to the nearest state that pots still illegal in to cover their asses.” And it’s true. That’s definitely what I thought. Man, I just, i dont even know what to say. I mean, I never thought it’d happen in my lifetime but it’s incredible, like I said about how a marijuana advocate must feel, I would think without a doubt if a very very passionate marijuana advocate didnt live in one of those two states I hope they move there on the double. On the other hand it’s just like, oh no, more victims now, now there’ll be twice as many junkies in colorado jails, twice as many crack heads, angels getting wet (like an angel will – underworld ‘born slippy’ trainspotting soundtrack) all going to suffer now…. and it saddens me man. It hurts my heart. Well, that’s all……. see you guys.

    • primus says:

      Your turn will come sooner because of the progress being made in cannabis relegalization. The approach which will eventually be taken for opiates will be different but more humane and more effective than what we have now. I have known since the 1960’s that prohibition is the wrong approach, why is it taking everyone else so long to figure it out? I didn’t used to think I was so much smarter than they are, but I guess I am.

    • Opiophiliac says:

      My greatest fear about cannabis legalization (or should I say re-legalization?) is that it will suck the momentum out of the reform movement. What will become of NORML after the marijuana laws reformed? Many of the pro-pot crowd draw the line at the “hard” drugs.

      Cannabis is indisputably the most popular of the illicit drugs and certainly the easiest case to make of the currently illegal drugs. But really heroin is less toxic than alcohol, it is prohibition than makes it a dangerous drug. Fighting through the biases people have is the hardest part. Once you get past the gut reaction, the “oh my God it’s heroin,” and learn about the pharmacology (heroin is just a pro-drug, metabolized to morphine in vivo), one realizes all the arguments against legal access to heroin also applies to alcohol.

      The worst case scenario, following the inevitable legalization of cannabis, would be no change in our prohibition paradigm. Other drug users could easy take up the slack from the change in priorities. This would be bad for the users of other drugs as there would be even more resources for the drug warriors (without having to fight weed).

      I think this is unlikely, as one oft repeated line about the developments in CO and WA was about removing a source of income from the cartels. And when the sky fails to fall after weed is legal it only strengthens the case for other drugs. Opiates are a more difficult sell to the public, but maybe we can go back to narcotic dispensing clinics. This is really a form of harm reduction and shouldn’t be mistaken as legalization (heroin by prescription is not legalized heroin, for me, the free market with regulations like alcohol is the ultimate goal), but may be the best opiate users can hope for in the foreseeable future. A sort of compromise between prohibition and legalization.

      • Pete says:

        I think you’ve got a fairly good handle on it. I don’t think the reform movement will go away, although it will certainly be diminished somewhat by the exodus of the cannabis-only crowd. The important thing is that for some time now, the reform movement has been preaching the evils of prohibition rather than the virtues of cannabis.

        In some ways, it’ll be a longer and harder road since public opinion is nowhere near legalization for other drugs. And yet, with cannabis out of the way, that also cuts off a huge portion of prohibition’s market, so they’ll have fewer resources and organized opposition will shrink dramatically.

        And yes, I agree that “harm reduction” will become the operative strategy in the short term.

      • darkcycle says:

        We’re not done, Opie. We just started.
        Common sense in drug policy is common sense in drug policy. Common sense is funny, once you recognize it, you see it’s applications everywhere. It is a paradigm shift more than a simple situational change.
        The shift to harm reduction has already started. Why did many people vote for legalization? To reduce the harms associated with our draconian pot laws.

  17. The point is, to Obama and the Federal Government anyone using marijuana is a fish. Big or small we are all in the pan with the fish.

    Since when does the government call voters fish? No wonder it is so easy to fill those prisons.

  18. Tony Aroma says:

    It occurred to me that the 2nd Amendment authorizes citizens to maintain an armed militia, ostensibly for protection against the federal government. Does that mean that local police can stop the feds from interfering? If you’re being raided by the feds, can you call the police and report an armed robbery? Would, or can, local police protect citizens from armed federal thugs?

    • Duncan20903 says:

      That sounds like something that happened in San Francisco in 2006. The story’s none too bright protagonist has decided that he wants to go snowboarding so he’s taking a couple of pounds of medicinal cannabis and hash to a dispensary to fund his vacation. He’s packed the assorted vegetable matter in a box with the logo of some very popular hydroponic gear.

      By happenstance two DEA agents had decided to take their lunch break. When they exit their building on their way to the donut shop they bump into the snow boarding botanist, noticing the distinct odor of ready to smoke cannabis products, recognized the logo of the hydroponics equipment company and confiscated the poor man’s medicine. The man called the SFPD and demanded that the DEA agents be arrested for strong arm robbery. There was no mention of how the SFPD responded.

      To market to market to sell a fat pig!

    • Windy says:

      The answer to your question is “yes”, PROVIDED the local police you call happens to be your county Sheriff and provided your county Sheriff happens to support your unalienable rights and the Constitution’s limits on the fed gov. The federal statutes criminalizing the production, selling and use of certain drugs are totally unconstitutional (as is claiming the fed gov has the legitimate Constitutional authority to control any drugs — pharmaceutical, OTC or illicit).

      • Windy says:

        I forgot to add the reason why it must be your county Sheriff. It is because the Sheriff is the highest level of law enforcement in your county, s/he outranks every other law enforcement agency, including federal LEOs, and has the power within the borders of his/her county to jail other LEO’s if they refuse his lawful orders, including his/her orders to leave his/her county residents alone, and get the hell out of his/her county. This is why your county Sheriff is the very most important elected position for which you vote, make certain you vet the candidates carefully to make certain they understand your unalienable rights, the Constitution (and its purpose to limit the actions of the fed gov against the people) and their power to enforce the Constitution, even on the fed gov.

  19. claygooding says:

    The CT tragedy stole our interview,,I wonder of they will air it next week or just shit can it?

  20. Nick says:

    We still haven’t reached the tipping point.
    I hope it happens before the earth gets too warm.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      I disagree. I think we couldn’t do anything to stop re-legalization even if we wanted to do so. I’ve never before seen such a monumental shift in the outlook of the outsiders. On Oct 30 I said in this very blog’s comments column that cannabis law reform community would get our Roe v Wade moment in the very near future and ding dang diddle it now I believe that moment happened on Election Day 2012.

      I’ve been observing this issue and its people for nearly 35 1/2 years and I never have seen anything like the current scenario. Even back in the late 1970s previous to those guys from NORML turning on the drug czar to cocaine during that Christmas party. Please nobody get Mr. Kerlikowske high on anything until our work is done.

      It ain’t over until it’s over, but in my estimation it’s over.

      • N.T. Greene says:

        Yeah, it’s not totally dead, but it makes me think of a certain Monty Python moment concerning a black knight with no legs or arms.

        “It’s just a flesh wound.”

        • claygooding says:

          I had the Monty Python pc game and you had to fight the black knight and all the stuff in that movie was in the game,,,never did get over the wooden swinging bridge.

        • Byddaf yn egluro: says:

          “never did get over the wooden swinging bridge.”

          That’s because you’re supposed to put the sword down, rip his face off, and shit on his head 🙂

        • claygooding says:

          I did that Malc,,,but found out I was supposed to eat three beef and bean burritos 8 hrs prior,,,

  21. claygooding says:

    or at least before Lil Debbies folds too.

    • claygooding says:

      Twinkies again by spring? It could happen

      It’s not even Christmas, but Twinkies fans may be able to start looking forward to an Easter present.

      Bankrupt Hostess Brands has received a number of bids from companies interested in buying the maker of Twinkies, Ho Hos, and Wonder bread, including retail heavyweights such as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and Kroger Co, Bloomberg News reported Friday, quoting an unnamed person familiar with the matter.

      The person asked not to be named because of the confidentiality of the bidding process, Bloomberg reported.

      I was worrying over nothing,,if Walmart buys Hostess at least the price will drop,,even if they taste different with rice flour instead of wheat flour.

      • Duncan20903 says:


        There’s no need to fear. One of Safeway’s store brands called The Snack Artist has recently introduced a twinkie clone for sale. They were stacked up on a promotional display directly inside the entrance and it made me wonder if that was because of the bankruptcy. The Snack Artist brand has been introducing new products for well over a year but the Twinkie clones are the first I’ve seen displayed so prominently.

        Assets don’t disappear because a company goes BK, they get new owners. It’s debt that disappears. There’s still an operating Boston Market (nee Boston Chicken) a couple of miles from me. McDonald’s bought the real estate from the bankruptcy estate and may still own that particular restaurant. There’s also Boston Market frozen dinners at the supermarket which only happened because Boston Market went teats up.

  22. Spoof says:

    “Iran’s prisons are filled with thousands of people who have been arrested and imprisoned for possession of what is, quite frankly, a harmless plant,” Mr. Ahmadinejad told the state-run IRIB television. “It doesn’t make sense to spend our resources imprisoning such people when other serious crimes, such as the consumption of alcohol or women disobeying their husbands, are happening each day.”

  23. claygooding says:

    President’s pot comments prompts call for policy

    SAN FRANCISCO (AP) – Medical marijuana advocates are taking some solace from President Obama’s statement that prosecuting individual users in Colorado and Washington is not a priority, but they want assurances that federal crackdowns on big pot dispensaries will end in California and other states.

    Local and state officials, meanwhile, called on the administration to clarify its enforcement policy in states with marijuana laws.

    Obama said federal authorities would leave alone individual users in Colorado and Washington, states that legalized recreational marijuana use.

    Still, federal officials said they will continue to try to shut down big commercial pot operations, whether they operate under state medical marijuana laws or not. The federal government is planning to soon release policies for dealing with marijuana in Colorado and Washington, where pot is now legal under state law. ‘snip’

    I went through 5 of this same article before i found it with comments open.

  24. allan says:

    here’s a chance for Prez Choom to extend an olive branch (but it needs our signatures):

    Relieve Five Elderly Federal Prisoners From Life Without Parole Sentences For Marijuana

  25. Peter says:

    The Guardian has a Colombian take on David Cameron’s rank hypocrisy in rejecting even looking at drug reform policy, absurdly maintaining that current policies “are working.” The article finishes by nailing him totally with his own words:
    ‘Precisely 10 years ago this month, a senior British politician said in a debate in the House of Commons: “I ask the Labour government not to return to retribution and war on drugs. That has been tried and we all know that it does not work.”

    That politician was David Cameron.’

  26. War Vet says:

    Pete -If nations like Switzerland can offer addicts free heroin, and if Holland can (in the grey) grow, use and sell cannabis and mushrooms and peyote . . . if Portugal can decriminalize and if England, Canada, Russia, China, Hungary, France etc. etc. can grow and sell industrial hemp to America and the rest of the world (a plant 100% like marijuana according to the law) –doesn’t this mean that the 1961 U.N. Single Convention laws on drugs are currently and legally void and all national laws surrounding it as non-valid as well . . . based on the fact that U.N. member nations had already broken the contract via international hemp growing and trading and by places that provide drugs like heroin and cannabis to users either free of charge or sold legally (and taxed) on the market. In Holland, you cannot buy pot with Dutch money, but you can buy pot with Euros, which makes the EU governments and banking systems culpable in making the 1961 U.N. law non-valid for marijuana.

    • thelbert says:

      sounds good to me, where was the plebiscite to determine the will of the people? this treaty is vestige of the aristocracy deciding what will be good for the little people. it would have worked forever, if not for the internet. we are fixing the mistakes of the plutocracy, and they hate it.

    • Duncan20903 says:


      The SC treaties allow for medical use with certain restrictions. The Swiss HAT program is in compliance with the treaty as is Great Britain where doctors can still prescribe heroin for severe pain. The treaty requires that the government be the vendor. That’s why Irv, Elvy and George get their joints from the UMiss cannabis farm.

      I admit that I don’t know for a fact but I don’t believe that Countries are required to criminalize petty possession. There’s an awful lot of treaty violations if that is required.

      But any way that you look at it the State’s aren’t signatories to the treaty.

      U.S. Constitution Article I, section 10, paragraph 1:
      No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.”

      • War Vet says:

        Interesting Duncan. So since the CSA is in violation of the Constitution, would it be safe to say in legal terms, that anyone who obeys the drug laws (like cops and judges) are in fact a Secessionist?

        • darkcycle says:

          Don’t you mean “treasonous”, Vet?
          Not really, from wiki: “Oran’s Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as “…[a]…citizen’s actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation].” In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aiding or involved by such an endeavor.”
          And secession, again from wiki: “Secession (derived from the Latin term secessio) is the act of withdrawing from an organization, union, or especially a political entity. Threats of secession also can be a strategy for achieving more limited goals.”
          So, uh…no. It may be a crime, it certainly is a violation of the constitution to uphold unjust laws. But not a State crime.

        • Windy says:

          Any violation of the Constitution’s limits on the fed gov or violation of a member of that gov’s oath of office certainly should be considered treasonous, because those violations were not just attempts to overthrow the legitimate fed gov, but were successful at overthrowing the Constitution itself, the founding document of the fed gov, and at the same time violating the unalienable rights of the people to be left alone by the gov. I consider that treason.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          Writing and an signing a Declaration of Independence was considered treason back in 1776. I do get a kick when someone is trying to convince people that citizens are required to blindly obey any law that the lawmakers pass and proceed to quote John Adams who said that we have “a government of laws and not of men.” …and if the British hadn’t lost the war he would have been hung by the neck until he was dead.

  27. Ned says:

    Ending prohibition is a political hot potato in their minds that none of them want to be responsible for. I get the feeling that Obama wants to be “made to do it”. That usually means that if it becomes clear that the political price to be paid has basically dropped to zero, like with gays in the military and gay marriage, then he will certainly sign or ok things brought to him. Not sure if he will actively be proactive himself even when it appears safe to do so. As a “black President”, I’m pretty sure he would prefer this not be on his record, although if it is forced upon him, so be it.

  28. allan says:

    so… if, as Pete says in his blogpost:

    So after a month, the President comes out and says… absolutely nothing.

    what does that say about this couch when we take 86 comments to talk about the Prez saying nothing? fffffff… dang! that’s good shit… fffff… ‘ere

    • darkcycle says:

      It says we’re bored, anxious, irritated at the administration, and itchin’ to push the fight. Buncha teens after the playoffs, and our team just made it to the championships.
      Whadya say? Lets crank the music and blow a coupla these here doobies. We still have to be rested for the next big game. 😉

      • allan says:

        I’m down with that. Just made a cuppla dozen green-butter chocolate (Ghiardelli dark) chip cookies… yummm…

        • TieHash says:

          That sounds delicious. As an avid baker does the addition of the “green butter” alter the flavor in a negative fashion?

        • allan says:

          I don’t negatively think so. I don’t over brown the butter and I add a touch of almond extract to the cookie dough (always from scratch). The browned butter and ganja has an almost roasted nut flavor. I cool the butter back down to room temp before mixing. All else stays the same (though the dough might need some hand kneeding/smooshing).

          Heck the smell in the kitchen from making green butter is worth the price of admission!

        • claygooding says:

          I made my first cannabutter using the boiling water method and made some molasses cookies with it,,I could hardly taste the cannabutter and the cookies had an excellent buzz

        • allan says:

          oatmeal cookies work well too, the tastes are really compatible.

          I’m thinkin’ ganja cooked w/ chorizo and egg burritos… breakfast w/ a built-in smile.

          and to think 35 – 40 some years ago I would just bake an ounce of cleaned Mescan into a batch of Betty Crocker brownies and call it good.

        • claygooding says:

          allan,I have wondered if grinding the marijuana into dust and mixing it in the cookies delivers medical compounds from the marijuana that melting the thc and cannabinoids from the surface of the leaf misses,,compounds inside the leaf that could be destroyed,changed or missed when vaporizing or smoking the same marijuana.

        • Duncan20903 says:


          If you wash the vegetable matter before extracting the water soluble nasty taste disappears. By washing I mean basically making tea. I use a cheap coffee maker because the temp of the warming plate is just about perfect. You don’t want to let it get too hot. I don’t treat the leaf like coffee the leaf goes directly into the carafe. The resulting tea has a maggot gagging taste and does not have any psychoactive effect. Yes sunshine, I drank a bunch to see what would happen.

          I’ve made a lot of edibles from vaporizer poop. It most certainly has an effect but it’s much more of a sleepy time effect. I’ve speculated that it has a significantly higher ratio of CBD:THC but that might be wrong. If you read research sponsored by CaNORML it says that there are 5 compounds in cannabis vaped at the optimal temp with two of them being THC and CBD. Combine that with the fact that it takes a lot of effort nowadays to find cannabis with more than marginal CBD content and I don’t have a lot of confidence in my speculation above.

        • divadab says:

          Duncan – I had the same sleepy-time effect from boiling up some stem chai. Added milk at the end and simmered for another half hour, then bottled and sweetened. One bottle started to ferment and it made for a fizzy chai – one mug before bedtime and sweet dreams!

          My theory (not yet tested!) is the same as yours – more CBD’s and less thc. I think it makes for more medicinal effect than psychoactive. I sure wake up rested and feeling fine!

  29. darkcycle says:

    It seems the passage of I-502 has been an unexpected boon to this area’s dispensaries. Both dispensaries with which I now deal have seen a big uptick in new customers. Not new SMOKERS, new CUSTOMERS. Seems not everybody liked buying from the guy who goes by the nickname “Mooky”. Now that it’s legal, people are demanding to be able to buy it legally. And have a selection to choose from. And be able to decline to buy without fear of being cut off….
    The thing is,…he dispensaries had everything invested in a certain business model and a certain customer. They were wedded to that and couldn’t see the garden for the cannabis plants.
    It’s a brave new f*cking world. Or, as they say in motorcycling, “wake up and smell the pavement”.

  30. Looks to me like its up to the new congress convening after the first of the year. The same one that Nancy Pelosi said the Democrats would take up the issue in. There is the bill by Jarrod Polis and others to remove legal states from obligation to the CSA. The issue in the Courts to review the medical value of marijuana.

    Obama is not going to do it alone. I think Ned is right

  31. claygooding says:

    I can’t figure out how they can leave it schedule 1 and have exceptions,,but then,it should have been removed from s-1 when Marinol was approved as a medicine because the ingredient they claimed was why marijuana was so dangerous suddenly wasn’t dangerous because it was medicine.

    Justice was that the stuff is so lousy it never created a black market for it.

    • Matthew Meyer says:

      Yeah, how exactly did that Marinol magic work anyway? If pot’s the devil’s weed and THC is its quintessence, how is it that you can sell it in a pharmacy and now it’s medicine…?

      Of course, the prohibs are still trying to score points with the “not your daddy’s THC levels” bit about “today’s marijuana.”

      Why is it not common(er) sense that nearly-100%-THC Marinol doesn’t make ax murderers, and neither will 20-some-percent herb?

      • allan says:

        oh Matthew… these are the same folks that list “euphoria” under negative side effects… convoluted doesn’t come close to describing the cognitive dissonance they suffer

    • Opiophiliac says:

      I long ago gave up trying to make sense of the whole CSA scheduling system. Why does heroin have no medical value in the US but does in the UK? It makes no sense especially when you realize that heroin converts to morphine in the body very rapidly. So heroin has no medical value, until you actually take it, when it then converts to a schedule 2 narcotic considered indispensable to modern medicine.

  32. allan says:

    Doh! I get ink again, today’s Register-Guard here in Eugene, Tipping point for marijuana legalization is here

    • Jeff Trigg says:

      Beautiful and appropriate Samuel Adams quote! Thank you for being awesome with your time, effort, and intelligence on this crucial issue of human freedom! I appreciate you sticking your neck out publicly, as I personally know the harm that can come from that. In Illinois, Democrat and teacher/union thugs might try to ruin your life with all the influence they can find just for publicly speaking against the practices and policies of someone like Rod Blagojevich (or Barack Obama). You are brave and I appreciate those efforts.

    • primus says:

      Well bowled, sir, well bowled.

  33. Jeff Trigg says:

    Barack Obama has officially been a drug warrior asshole since 1998. Nothing has changed with him at all, he’s still a career politician that will do and say just about anything for his Party and their power over individual Americans.

    Note, saying “it shouldn’t be a top priority to use our taxpayer resources for” is hardly the same thing as saying “we WILL NOT use our precious taxpayer resources for this”. Just ask Richard Lee about Obama’s same statements about using federal resources on medical cannabis. That is just typical, despicable politician speak. Granted, that kind of political speak got him elected to the White House because 98.5% of the voting public are complete idiots thanks to our failing, greedy, teacher union monopoly education system that can’t even graduate 50% of the students in Obama’s old State Senate District, but still…

    American voters are mostly idiots and have been since day one of this country’s founding when the vast majority voter opinion was that slavery was just fine with them. Centralized government control over vast numbers of human beings has, and always will, fail. Be prepared. American voters are, and have always been, gullible idiots who have now lead us into another debt bubble depression that will last another decade at least.

    The Feds and States STILL want to spend precious income taxes on keeping cannabis illegal when 25% of the employed people in this country are making less than $10/hour, when 40+% of those age 30 and below are unemployed, when our debt bubble in states like Illinois and cities like Vallejo and Stockton CA, Detroit are bursting, when HALF of all children born in Illinois have irresponsible parents who need government to pay for their child’s birth, and when those Medicaid paid for children being born today face 60+% future tax rates just to pay off the debt of this generation’s lavish government spending? If you still vote for any Democrats or Republicans in America, YOU ARE AN IDIOT!

    50 million (out of 350 million) Americans getting food stamps right now. How many of those 50 million are we encouraging and teaching to GROW at least some of their own food on their porches in buckets or in their backyard or at their church’s community garden plot? ZERO. Idiots, we all are, including myself.

    • claygooding says:

      Jeff,,I believe that Obama was saddled with Joe Biden as his VP for a reason,,corporations put Joe Biden in so he would step in if Obama does anything that encourages reform or ends prohibition,,he is in the same position Kennedy was in with Johnson as his VP,,the corporations selling guns to the government had Johnson in place,,in case Kennedy refused to engage in VN,he did and he died.

      I think Obama thinks about that every time he opens his mouth.

      • Jeff Trigg says:

        Clay, thank you for being engaging and civil with me, I do appreciate that.

        As for Joe “Lock up Chong and his bong” Biden, he’s just one in long line of other Democrat thug assholes Barack Obama has been saddled with. Rod Blagojevich, endorsed by Barack Obama, Todd Stroger, William Beavers, Dick Daley, Jesse Jackson Jr., Edward Burke and his IL Supreme Court justice wife Anne (Google Baby T who they stole/adopted from a “drug addicted” mother), Michael Madigan, Obama’s mentor Emil Jones Jr., Steve Preckwinkle / David Picciolli teacher union lobbyist pension millionaires because of ONE DAY substitute teaching, the Muntu Dance Theater, Father Fleger’s crusade against “head shops”, Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s state subsidies and a whole flock of corrupt Illinois/Chicago machine Democrat politicians are all Democrat thug assholes Barack Obama has voluntarily and gladly let himself be saddled with.

        That said, I must say I’m proud that Americans aren’t still idiot enough to not vote for a black (even half) President, but still, Obama is an asshole and cancer on this country that we would be much better off without. And I should give credit to his wife Michelle for momentarily encouraging more people start gardening even though she also demanded ten of millions be spent on radio advertising for her Let’s Move campaign waste of precious money.

        The Federal Reserve will print (out of thin air) an estimated $1.8 trillion in 2013. $400 billion, 20+%, handed to mortgage backed securities on a silver platter. Yet more rich people bankster bailouts under Obama’s willing nose. BUT, if you divided that $1.8 trillion among the 33% of Americans in poverty instead of giving it to the rich, we (the Fed Reserve) could provide $15,000 for EVERY poor person in America in 2013 with that money printed from thin air given to the rich and their banksters. We are all idiots and we are all fucked. As soon as 2018 in my estimates. Be prepared. Cannabis legalization/ending the drug war may be the least of our problems in the next decade.

        How much had the FED printed out of thin air since Barack Obama became President? Divide that by the 350 million American population. If you were really poor, what could you have done with $80,000 over the past 5 years? The massive, unprecedented debt bubble in Illinois, California, the US, Greece, Spain, Europe, and most of the world who currently carrying massive debts WILL burst, one way or another. (Yes, Bush and the Republicans were/are evil too.) Be prepared.

    • Duncan20903 says:

      Gosh Jeff, you really should give decaf a try.

      • Jeff Trigg says:

        Well Duncan, that’s pretty much what many well-intentioned folks said to the likes of George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Frederick Douglass, Abraham Lincoln, American Indian Tribal Chiefs, Susan B. Anthony, Elizabeth Cady Stanton, and most others who vociferously fought for basic human freedoms. Go along to get along is what most people will say. I don’t buy that philosophy for a second. I can do math and can recognize idiot tyranny when I see it.

      • Jeff Trigg says:

        Which is also to say, nothing personal Duncan, I’m sure you are a fabulous human being, but maybe, just maybe, you should consider quitting the de-caf to let the full strength caffeine open your eyes a little wider.

  34. primus says:

    When they show him the movie of Kennedy’s murder and suddenly he realizes that the movie is shot from the perspective of the grassy knoll, it all comes clear to him.

    • claygooding says:

      I feel that Obama wants to be the first black President and he wants to be the one credited with ending prohibition but he doesn’t want to be the first black President martyr,,,,so he couldn’t be Muslim.

      • Jeff Trigg says:

        I don’t believe Obama wants to be credited with ending prohibition. Nothing in his history suggests that. After 14 years holding major public offices, he has never even come up with one letter like commenter Alan here just had published. Obama is a drug warrior asshole. A dictator on this issue, without any hesitation holding a government gun to YOUR head and locking YOU in a cage for something he did himself. He might not believe it’d be a wise use of federal resources to lock you in a cage, but Obama would NOT hesitate in doing just that.

        • claygooding says:

          I am sorry you think you have to convince EVERYONE to hate Obama as much as you do but I voted for Gary Johnson because I know Obama is locked into his position whether it’s his choice or not. As said earlier in this thread,,we couldn’t stop re-legalization if we wanted too,,the snowball has grown too large to stop,,,but we are still pushing it right along.

        • Jeff Trigg says:

          So why do you feel like Obama wants to be credited with ending prohibition? Is your feeling justified somehow?

          Why shouldn’t everyone hate a person that wouldn’t hesitate holding a gun to your head and locking you in a cage for cannabis? Why should anyone try to justify or defend or praise a person like Obama who hates cannabis and hates human beings who possess cannabis so much that they would use violence and guns to enforce their severe hatred of cannabis and its users? What is more hateful than using the massive power of government to hold a gun to people’s heads in an effort to prohibit cannabis, my words? I think not.

        • allan says:

          I really think it has less to do with Obama and more your intensity in using the word hate. Plenty of that to go around, we need far less of it. Far less…

  35. allan says:

    well heck, we need a musical interlude (the old folks will recognize it):

    What Are Their Names?

    It fits my mood (it’s fit my mood for almost 40 years) and who are all these folks asking this question?

    David Crosby, electric guitar, vocal; Neil Young, electric guitar, vocal; Jerry Garcia, electric guitar, vocal; Phil Lesh, bass, vocal; Michael Shrieve, drums; Graham Nash, Joni Mitchell, David Freiberg, Paul Kantner, Grace Slick, vocals

    • claygooding says:

      Listening now,,it wasn’t the movie shot from the grassy knoll that convinced me that Kennedy was a coup and not a simple assassination,,it’s the sealed records that won’t be opened until all are dead that lived through it.

  36. Pingback: The politics of Presidential pot statements « Drug WarRant

Comments are closed.