OBAMA AND WEED

KINGPIFF said:

He is a Muslim. He even said it himself. He's also a distant cousin of George Bush and Dick Cheney. He's also a liar, saying how he voted against the Iraq war when he wasn't even a member of the senate. When he was in Senate he voted to fund the war, liar indeed. If Obama is president be prepared for a National I.D. card, a North American Union, higher taxes, shitty medical coverage, shit load of illegal immigrants because he supports the welfare state, I could go on and on. It would be such a sad day to see this man elected president.

Click to expand...

KINGPIFF said:

He is a Muslim. He even said it himself. He's also a distant cousin of George Bush and Dick Cheney. He's also a liar, saying how he voted against the Iraq war when he wasn't even a member of the senate. When he was in Senate he voted to fund the war, liar indeed. If Obama is president be prepared for a National I.D. card, a North American Union, higher taxes, shitty medical coverage, shit load of illegal immigrants because he supports the welfare state, I could go on and on. It would be such a sad day to see this man elected president.

Click to expand...

bergerbuddy said:

NONE... YOu think "Clinton" is better than Obama??? HELL... she voted FOR the war and she is PART OF THE POWER STRUCTURE WE NEED TO DESTROY IN WA. D.C.

Click to expand...

Rosy Cheeks said:

I would put it this way instead. There's a power structure in place in Washington D.C that does not depend on elections for power. They never leave office, because they do not hold office. They influence the office with money, lobbying, and a network of "friends" that are in all the major national institutions. They're in the Senate, the Congress, the Military, the Oil Industry, etc. They're very much involved in the election process though, trying to get a suitable puppet in place. Whenever the wrong guy wins, they go into damage control mode. They 'contain' the President, his administration and reforms by blocking his moves, restraining his influence, make his politics fail, etc. This has happened to many Presidents that has taken office from outside the power structure. They arrive at the White House and they think they run the country, but in fact they find that many doors are closed and they can't get things done.

You can't get rid of these guys unless you literally stage a revolution. A President simply hasn't got the authority to clean house in that sense, and luckily he/she doesn't, because it would mean an all-powerful President that can do exactly what he/she wants, in other words a Dictator. What a President can do is to replace some off these people with his own people successively as they drop off, but it's a slow process and not even two mandates is enough for that.

Sometimes, things get out of hand. Like with the Kennedys. I believe John F got killed because of Robert F's war on the power structure, and Robert F got killed because of himself. Normally it doesn't come to that, but if things get really cranky and the President just doesn't want to play the game, it will.

Now, the only way to fight these guys with the means avaible is to create your own power structure in order to counter balance their influence. Which means you need lots of friends in Washington. It doesn't matter if the American people is behind you, you have to know your way around D.C, which men's room to use and not to use, what palms to grease, etc.

What's particular about Obama is that he's even more an outsider than some of the other Presidents that have tried to rock the boat, such as John F Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, or a young Bill Clinton. He's got no money, no influential family behind him (I mean let's face it, G.W Bush would have at the most become a McDonald's store Manager if his family had not been there to coach him through life), no friends in the right positions. He's so totally out of Washington that 'they' probably like him, because they know he's a lightweight and can be easily controlled.

That's right. The bad guys are probably happy with an Obama vs McCain scenario. Those they were concerned about have already dropped out, or are dropping out.

Don't get me wrong. I like Obama. He can seduce a crowd, he dresses well, he can dance, he only says good things, only want to do good things. He uses the "Change" word a lot, and if he gets elected President, he will probably kick the country into a state of short-lived euphoria. But... it's not going to do squat against Sauron and his Orc Army, unless he's got a magic stick with real power, and he doesn't.

Because this is not fiction, it's real life.

Click to expand...

Nov. 24 said:

"My attitude is, if the science and the doctors suggest that the best palliative care and the best way to relieve pain and suffering is through medical marijuana then that's something I'm open to, because there's no difference between that and morphine when it comes to just giving people relief from pain. But I want to do it under strict guidelines. I want to make sure that it is prescribed in the same way that other painkillers or palliative drugs would be prescribed. I'm concerned about folks just kind of growing their own and saying it's for medicinal purposes, because that's kind of a slippery slope."

Click to expand...

Obama states, "I think the war on drugs has been a failure, and I think we need to rethink and decriminalize our marijuana laws." Obama continued, saying that while he supported decriminalization, he did not support the full legalization of marijuana.

In contrast, Senator Obama appeared to oppose decriminalization in a 2007 Democratic primary debate when MSNBC moderator Tim Russert asked candidates who opposed then-candidate Senator Chris Dodd’s support of decriminalization to raise their hands. In the video, Senator Obama is seen hesitantly raising his hand halfway before quickly lowering it again.

When asked about the two different answers, Senator Obama’s campaign stated that he has "always" supported decriminalization, and that Obama misunderstood the question when he raised his hand in the debate. In that same statement, Obama’s campaign reiterated the Senator’s opposition to full legalization, but said that an Obama administration "will review drug sentences to see where we can be smarter on crime and reduce the blind and counterproductive sentencing of non-violent offenders."

"It appears Senator Obama, alone among the major candidates for the presidency, has the courage to state the obvious: it is time that we stopped treating responsible marijuana smokers like criminals," said NORML Executive Director Allen St. Pierre. "According to a recent CNN/Time Warner poll, 76% of the American people agree with Senator Obama, as well as the 48 million Americans who smoked marijuana last year."

Democratic rival Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton’s campaign stated that she opposes decriminalization. On the Republican side, Senator John McCain opposes decriminalization, while former Utah Governor Mitt Romney opposes both decriminalization and physician-recommended access to medical cannabis.

Click to expand...

Washington, DC: Senator Barack Obama’s campaign backed away from statements made last week affirming the Senator’s support for decriminalizing marijuana, after being confronted with inconsistencies in his past and present campaigns on the issue by the Washington Times.

A spokesman for Obama’s campaign blamed confusion over the meaning of decriminalization for the inconsistencies, and said that while Obama does not support decriminalization, "we are sending far too many first-time, nonviolent drug users to prison for very long periods of time, and that we should rethink those laws."

Click to expand...

Hillary Clinton said:

"With respect to medical marijuana, you know I think that we have had a lot of rhetoric and the federal government has been very intent upon trying to prevent states from being able to offer that as an option for people who are in pain. I think we should be doing medical research on this. We ought to find what are the elements that claim to be existing in marijuana that might help people who are suffering from cancer and nausea-related treatments. We ought to find that out. I don't think we should decriminalize it, but we ought to do research into what, if any, medical benefits it has."
Oct. 11, 2007 Hillary Clinton

Click to expand...

Rosy Cheeks said:

I personally feel that both Obama or Hillary lack vision on this matter. Edwards on the other hand proposed that the question of decriminalisation of Cannabis should be taken by the Food and Drug Administration, and not by politicians.

If you think about that for a second, it makes sense. The real problem is that Cannabis has become an ideological/political question that has been blown way out of proportions. Thanks to the fact that it became a political issue during the Nixon era, USA now has a War on Drugs that costs American tax payers billions of dollars a year, a grotesque Drug Enforcement Administration with an annual budget of $ 2.5 billion and 11 000 employees, not to mention the FBI and the CIA. It's one big, powerful hamster wheel no politician can stop spinning that easily.

Had the question beeen delegated to the FDA in the first place, the decision would no longer be political, but scientific. It would fall under the Public Health Service Act. They do take orders from the White House, but they don't make decisions based on ideology, religious or prejudice beliefs, which politicians do.

Click to expand...

peanutbutter said:

The FDA is not allowed to consider positive studies on marijuana by law.

Click to expand...

Rosy Cheeks said:

... Normally it doesn't come to that, but if things get really cranky and the President just doesn't want to play the game, it will...

...it's not going to do squat against Sauron and his Orc Army, unless he's got a magic stick with real power, and he doesn't.

Because this is not fiction, it's real life.

Click to expand...

Rosy Cheeks said:

If what you say is correct, it only proves the point. It's kind of like if the CIA or the NSA would not have had the right by law to concider reports that stated that the Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq were non-existent.

Click to expand...

Germanator said:

Do not mind KingPiff, he is here for Ron Paul with a small side dish of cannabis cultivation.

Click to expand...

Rosy Cheeks said:

You summed it up pretty well sugabear. What annoys me with Hillary is that whenever the decriminalisation question pops up, she side-steps it by saying that we should "think about it" and "do research" (there's more than half a century of extensive research done already, and it speaks a clear language: Cannabis is one of the most innoffensive drugs avaible).

But, you're not going to get a clear answer on that issue from neither Hillary or Obama. The race is too tight, one little slip could cost them the nomination - and the Precidency. They're both going to avoid the decriminalisation question like a hot potato.

I personally feel that both Obama or Hillary lack vision on this matter. Edwards on the other hand proposed that the question of decriminalisation of Cannabis should be taken by the Food and Drug Administration, and not by politicians.

If you think about that for a second, it makes sense. The real problem is that Cannabis has become an ideological/political question that has been blown way out of proportions. Thanks to the fact that it became a political issue during the Nixon era, USA now has a War on Drugs that costs American tax payers billions of dollars a year, a grotesque Drug Enforcement Administration with an annual budget of $ 2.5 billion and 11 000 employees, not to mention the FBI and the CIA. It's one big, powerful hamster wheel no politician can stop spinning that easily.

Had the question beeen delegated to the FDA in the first place, the decision would no longer be political, but scientific. It would fall under the Public Health Service Act. They do take orders from the White House, but they don't make decisions based on ideology, religious or prejudice beliefs, which politicians do.

Click to expand...

John Edwards, former U.S. Senator (D-NC), stated in a conversation with Clayton Holton, a volunteer for Granite Staters for Medical Marijana, on Sep. 8, 2007:

Q:"I would like to thank you for saying you would stop the raids against medical marijuana patients with their doctors' permission. I would like to ask you how you will keep patients like myself and others out of jail for using it as medicine and lesser medications that cause harmful side effects?"

John Edwards: "What I've said, for those of you who don't know what he's talking about, these raids that are being used -- you obviously follow this very closely -- these raids that are being done against patients, I will not do as President of the United States and would put a stop to. What I've also said is, I really think that we need to put the FDA [Food and Drug Administration] in charge of this instead of having -- right now it's just a political football. I think if we give the FDA the responsibility and have them determine how to treat this -- if somebody like you who needs medical marijuana to ease your pain and there's not other medications that can accomplish it, then the FDA can say that. But what we have right now is a situation where it's a huge political football, it's used for political rhetoric, and the result is a lot of people are being punished as a result. And so that's what I would do, I would put it under the responsibility of the FDA and I would stop these raids. That's what I would do."
Sep. 8, 2007 John Edwards

Click to expand...

sugabear_II said:

now when the MMJ clubs put a vending machine up - CNN picks that up , silence.

Click to expand...