Even political leaders will be forced to follow

There are parts of this country that would never even have seriously discussed legalization, but that’s changing…

Politicians may soon have to take marijuana legalization seriously – Kansas City Star

In our area, the chances of overturning marijuana laws by legislative action seem remote, for now. It’s a tough vote for a politician in an election year.

But change is coming, just the same. Like the dispute over same sex marriage, the public’s attitudes about legal pot appear to be outpacing the views of the legislators they elect.

“We’ve had 80-plus years of failed policy, billions of dollars wasted and untold numbers of lives ruined in the name of controlling a substance that is no more harmful (and probably less so) than alcohol,” one emailer wrote this week. “The Colorado approach is a sane, sustainable policy option.”

State lawmakers will be getting more letters like that, from clear-eyed voters.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Even political leaders will be forced to follow

  1. Crut says:

    So… thinking of the children, I don’t want my children to grow up in an environment where his/her choice of recreation is a crime. Whether that recreation is jumping off a bridge with a rubber band around their ankles, or sitting on the couch exploring the universe inside their heads, it doesn’t matter. If there is one thing to teach our children, it’s that moderation is the key. If you go overboard in ANYTHING, your risk of severe consequences increases. Start slow, and creep up to your own PERSONAL LIMITS. Sometimes you’ll exceed those limits, and that rubber band will snap.

    Why hello life! I woke up again this morning, it’s a beautiful day.

    • War Vet says:

      I don’t want your children to ever have to go to war fighting drug money after a drug money financed series of attacks in North America, Europe, Asia and Africa. Obviously keeping drugs illegal increases the powers of police and politicians, so who’s to say America won’t force your children to go to war via a draft? I’m friends with a young lady who was between 7 or 8 during 9/11 and now she’s been to Afghanistan because of illegal drugs. Her influence for joining the Army was so she could take care of a ‘rape’ baby she had as a young 16 year old girl. When she was young, her father did hard long time for selling pot, so the odds of her getting raped was probably created by having a father forced away from her, which sent her down her current path. And again, because drugs are illegal, I have another very young friend who went off to Afghanistan and because of the illegal laws on pot, he’ll become an expert drinker, instead of taking a toke to party or relieve stress and nightmares with . . . not saying he wouldn’t drink, but it would be better if he had a choice that didn’t have negative consequences. And then there is another fellow a few years younger than me who likes his beer and has bad PTSD (thank God the cops sent him to the hospital instead of jail after having a drunken mishap). Because he’s 100% disabled, he is not legally allowed to work in America with that status. I’d like to think that pot could open up his world (and I don’t know if he does it or ever did) to escape hell on earth . . . his eyes look like the eyes of a dog that had been beaten too many times. He is a very bright and good natured young man.

      But it was the war on drugs that financed our enemies and that is why I label all opposing cops, journalists and politicians etc with the appropriate name: Muslim Terrorist (and if we were at war with Canadians because of drug money financing, I’d call these prohibitionist folk, Canadian Terrorists, even if they never visited Canada nor practiced Canadianism) . . . anybody helping or wanting drugs to be illegal is currently helping the enemy through the law’s consequence of giving them drug money, hence my labeling of them. Kev-Kev is a Muslim Terrorist and drug money is a powerful thing (or maybe there is absolutely no link or connection to the drug laws and drug dealing, but mere coincidences, totally unrelated).

      If the War on Drugs is a multi-headed beast with disasters to even those who don’t sell or use or live in drug producing regions, then surly we can label these prohibisites with multiple negative names that are fitting to the various disasters they created with their laws. Kev-Kev and his motley crew are also child molesters and rapists since it doesn’t take a rocket scientist to realize that drug money and drug laws increases said horrid incidents worldwide i.e. Afghanistan’s children and my young female friend. I think it’s only appropriate to label such offenders with such a name if they enable the negative act. Why else do we arrest people who hire someone to commit acts like murder, even if the convicted person didn’t technically do it, but merely hired the assassin?

      So this is why we are on the couch, to influence and help keep your children safe Crut (sorry for the length of the content, but so is the list of victims of the drug war).

  2. claygooding says:

    I think having the Senate leadership supporting MMJ has swung the pendulum,,,this very morning an ALA legislature chairman has a story on how he went to a hospital and had an epiphany and suddenly supports medical marijuana,,I think over the next few months,,,just before the campaigns for re-election start up,,,there will be a plague of epiphanies.

    • Windy says:

      But how many of those epiphanies will be legit, and how many because elections?

    • War Vet says:

      Senator Tom Coburn is quitting for good because he has cancer for the third time. I’ve written to him before about the war on drugs and the value of hemp/cannabis. Why don’t we write the ill Oklahoma politician about cannabis as medicine. I’ve worn out my welcome when writing to him and he already expects me to write to him about this and with my issues in regards to the war on drugs and how he stands, my only sympathetic words to him would come from the lines in ‘Halfbaked’: “More reasons to toke up–ease the pain”.

  3. Howard says:

    Certain Texas politicians still don’t get it (not a surprise). An OpEd from the Dallas Morning News;

    “Last fall, this newspaper repeatedly contacted the gubernatorial campaigns of Republican Greg Abbott and Democrat Wendy Davis for their positions on medical marijuana and related issues. Neither would respond.”


    Nothing is more cowardly that simply not responding to a query about an increasingly emerging issue. Then again, Texas politicians are an especially pernicious bunch (both sides of the aisle).

    • claygooding says:

      I contacted Gregg Abbot and got the “it is a schedule 1 drug answer,,Wendy Davis never answered and I didn’t like her on FB,,every time one of her supporters puts a link on my page I clearly state I will support her when she supports marijuana reform and not until then. Regardless of how much she supports women’s rights and other social programs without support for drug law reform she is just another shill.

  4. Howard says:

    I guess we could come to expect this;

    Lawmakers Abandoning Medical Marijuana Bills For CBD-Only Bills


    This fight will go on and on and…

    • claygooding says:

      So,,it is still cannabis,,,how will they know if your cannabis has thc and cbds?

      • Howard says:

        I suspect the point being that there will be attempts to allow CBD rich oil as the only medicine allowed. That way the two faced pols can claim they support medical marijuana — minus the plant itself. Sneaky bastards.

        • John says:

          There was a medical marijuana hearing in the Kentucky legislature a few days ago. It eventually devolved into a CBD oil only discussion.

    • kaptinemo says:

      This is why I refer to MMJ as first-stage in a multi-stage rocket; it’s gotten us into orbit, but can take us no further.

      Full-on re-legalization is the only way to stop the prohib termites from nibbling away at the few gains made from MMJ. I say ‘few’, because in my opinion, so long as the prohibs can use ‘he said/she said’ BS regarding the (officially ignored) medical utility of cannabis, we’ll still have helpless, sick people laying on the battlefield STILL being bayoneted by the other side with impunity. The ongoing raids in California since 1996 and Prop215’s inception are proof of that.

      Re-legalization leaves them no wiggle room. Re-legalization means an end to the use of that ‘wedge’ used by the prohibs so they can continue with ‘business as usual’.

      No more half-measures. No more ‘Chinese menu’: a little freedom in a third of the States, a lot in two, none at all in the remaining. It’s Montrose’s Toast time…particularly when we’re already winning through slow attrition on our opponents’ side; we can’t lose.

      It’s time for the end-game. It’s time for full-on re-legalization. Anything less is just sewing yourself a cul-de-sac to jump into, and wait for the jackboots to start kicking it.

  5. N.T. Greene says:


  6. Servetus says:

    Lawmakers stand to lose much by being on the wrong side of history. They risk being made comparable to ex-slave-holders and other common enemies of civil-rights.

    Many state legislators understand the critical need to abolish prohibition before a public referendum does it first. Otherwise, a referendum win means citizens are taking back their government, a threat and an embarrassment to the irrelevant lawmakers and politicians whose jobs involve dismissing public demands for freedom and justice simply because they believe it wins them votes.

Comments are closed.