• CD Moderators: someguyontheinternet
  • Cannabis Discussion Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules

Ask Obama WHY he doesn't support legalization

R

robobond

Greenlighter
Joined
Dec 29, 2008
Messages
1
A new round of Obama's Open for Questions exercise has begun! Please help keep the matter of marijuana legalization in the minds of our elected officials. Though you may not find this issue to be of pressing need, open dialogue about smart and compassionate policies should have an effect on our entire conglomerate of misguided governmental policy. This would actually help to reduce spending, reduce non-violent prison populations (which are out of control), while increasing tax revenue and personal safety. All I'm asking you to do, and it should only take about one more minute:

  • Visit the change.gov Open for Questions page
  • Register or login on the site (instant - no email verification required)
  • Do a search for questions with "prohibitionist"
  • And then click the check mark to vote for the following question:
    "Why won't you support the federal legalization of marijuana, which would increase tax revenue, reduce social harm, and create new jobs by regulating an industry that already exists in the US, even amidst our current prohibitionist policy?"
    Click to expand...

Hopefully we can receive a more substantive response this time around. Please vote in favor of the similar questions as well (there are quite a few!). The more frequently we can place these questions in their Top 10, the more likely the administration is to offer a comprehensive response, as well as the more likely the general populous will be to honestly reconsider our failed drug policy.

Even though our previous question garnered the #1 spot in Obama's first "Open for Questions" exercise, his administration skirted the meat of it and simply stated that "President-elect Obama is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana." Let's try to find out a little more about WHY he does not favor this seemingly sensible path. Fortunately, the issue has been receiving some positive media attention:
"Apparently, the arrest of nearly 1,000,000 otherwise law abiding citizens each year for mere possession of cannabis, the relentless persecution of the sick and dying, and the continued incarceration of 1 out of every 100 adults, (and the imprisonment, jailing, probation or parole of 1 out of every 31 adults) is finally getting on peoples nerves.

Yes, these questions will not go away. Lawmakers around the country will have to suck it up and realize that, as Barney Frank put it: this is an area where the public is way ahead of the politicians."
Click to expand...

Thanks for taking just a minute to help evoke positive change!
 
Because the corporations, who are the priority over the citizens in America, don't want weed because it competes with their products.
 
he just seems cool in contrast to other politicians. he will not "change" much in his time in office. its sad. he had the power of a revolution behind him. i wish mccain had won.
 
Can all of you do me a favor and type in federal reserve in the search questions box and check all the questions that deal with getting rid of it. I wanna see what Mr Obama has to say about our debt based monetary policy.
 
mrjackjones said:
he just seems cool in contrast to other politicians. he will not "change" much in his time in office. its sad. he had the power of a revolution behind him. i wish mccain had won.
Click to expand...

right..b/c a conservative republican would definitely support legalized marijuana....

i wish ron paul had won - WOOH FOR LIMITED GOVERNMENT!!
 
I'm sure this has already been brought up somewhere, but I think we should be focusing on decriminalization rather than legalization for now, especially considering it's already been determined and confirmed that he's [still] not in favor of its legalization. I don't think we'll be able to change his mind on the issue, and even if he were in favor, I doubt he'd go through with it considering the opposition he would face from doing so.

What may be possible from the Obama administration, and actually quite probable in my opinion, is the alternative that still allows "penalties" for its sale, possession, and cultivation, but brings us a step closer to where we want it to be. There are quite a lot of people opposed to "drugs," or at least recreational drug use, regardless of which ones we're talking about. Decriminalization could be shown to the general public as a way that would reduce the massive amounts of money we're spending on the failed war on drugs (saving the government, and thus the people, a lot of wasted money), and actually generate revenue from fines, while still keeping it "illegal" (which is what a lot of misinformed people would want). A disturbing number of people I've met seem to think that by legalizing it, millions would immediately start smoking cannabis and cause all kinds of havoc and crime. They only know the misinformation spreading around on TV commercials and in schools that they think "criminal" penalties are deserved, so in order to successfully make some headway, we must compromise and give it time.

Obama has already stated that he is in favor of decriminalization and not legalization. As far as I know, he still may be in favor of doing so. This would be a stepping stone to legalization, and here's how:

It's not that difficult once decriminalization is in place to simply change "fines" to "taxes." It's essentially a change in terminology. Once marijuana has been decriminalized on the federal level, a decade down the line we may be able to successfully argue that legalization, taxation, and regulation should replace decriminalization with the idea that the government could have more control over it. Instead of simply generating revenue from those who are caught with it, it would be possible to tax all marijuana users (e.g. cultivation licenses, sale tax), put strict regulations on its sale to help prevent minors from accessing it (perhaps referencing how much more difficult it is for minors to access alcohol than illegal drugs), its safety, etc.

It seems that it would be better to gradually change the mindset of those in opposition through decriminalization than attempt to do so overnight by pushing legalization. This is why I'm hoping that the questions promoted to the top this time around are concerned with decriminalization, not asking why he doesn't support legalization, when he really may, but won't say it as it'd be political suicide at this point.

The people of this country want marijuana decriminalization, when will marijuana be decriminalized? Why continue to spend billions of dollars to prohibit marijuana when evidence shows that the war on drugs is, as you said, "an utter failure"?
Click to expand...
This is the question I'd like to see be at the top this time around.
 
fuck. cannabis decriminalization is the least of our worries. my concern is that it wont take much to appear to have changed from the current administrations position. the masses have taken a methaphorical sedative by electing obama president. the momentum has been stopped. the white collared pigs still win. the cops still put people in prison. republicans suck at life, and democrats have no balls.

...but at least the "cool" black guy won eh?
 
I can't find the question. Was it removed or something?

Edit-Nevermind, I just needed to log in. I hit up all the bud related ones I saw. You should too!
 
Last edited:
auto238367 said:
Because the corporations, who are the priority over the citizens in America, don't want weed because it competes with their products.
Click to expand...

exactly. it actually competes on many levels of the economy from food to fuel to clothing.
 
This country needs far more pressing issues dealt with first. I support legalization and even have a MMJ card, but without a stable economy, better healthcare what is pot going to do?

So many smoke it regardless anyways and from what i have seen more people abuse the system than the pill junkies.
 
the majority of united states citizens don't want it legalized..
therefore, he wants the majority of the votes.
Click to expand...
are you sure about that?

Anyone whos seem the damage bush admin & fed did in California to legit medical patients & old people would know this isnt the kind of thing you can make excuses for not dealing with. Also, a lot of data is coming in saying THC is a cancer preventer. If we legalized a super crop and the massive industry it brings emerges & potentially supplys many jobs to millions of Americans & would boom over night. Before the Marijuana tax act of 1937 Marijuana/hemp was projected to be the First Super crop (crop to surpass one billion dollars annual in revenue) in the United states, commerical industry was threatened & generated massive amounts of propaganda & prohibition, time to reverse it sooner then later no more excuses please.

For the first 162 years of America's existence, marijuana was totally legal and hemp was a common crop. But during the 1930s, the U.S. government and the media began spreading outrageous lies about marijuana, which led to its prohibition. Some headlines made about marijuana in the 1930s were: "Marijuana: The assassin of youth." "Marijuana: The devil's weed with roots in hell." "Marijuana makes fiends of boys in 30 days." "If the hideous monster Frankenstein came face to face with the monster marijuana, he would drop dead of fright." In 1936, the liquor industry funded the infamous movie titled Reefer Madness. This movie depicts a man going insane from smoking marijuana, and then killing his entire family with an ax. This campaign of lies, as well as other evidence, have led many to believe there may have been a hidden agenda behind Marijuana Prohibition.


Shortly before marijuana was banned by The Marijuana Tax Act of 1937, new technologies were developed that made hemp a potential competitor with the newly-founded synthetic fiber and plastics industries. Hemp's potential for producing paper also posed a threat to the timber industry (see New Billion-Dollar Crop). Evidence suggests that commercial interests having much to lose from hemp competition helped propagate reefer madness hysteria, and used their influence to lobby for Marijuana Prohibition. It is not known for certain if special interests conspired to destroy the hemp industry via Marijuana Prohibition, but enough evidence exists to raise the possibility.


After Alcohol Prohibition ended in 1933, funding for the Federal Bureau of Narcotics (now the Drug Enforcement Administration) was reduced. The FBN's own director, Harry J. Anslinger, then became a leading advocate of Marijuana Prohibition. In 1937 Anslinger testified before Congress in favor of Marijuana Prohibition by saying: "Marijuana is the most violence causing drug in the history of mankind." "Most marijuana smokers are Negroes, Hispanics, Filipinos and entertainers. Their Satanic music, jazz and swing, result from marijuana usage. This marijuana causes white women to seek sexual relations with Negroes." Marijuana Prohibition is founded on lies and rooted in racism, prejudice, and ignorance. Just as politicians believed Harry J. Anslinger to be a marijuana expert in 1937, many people still believe law enforcement officials are marijuana experts. In reality, law enforcement officials have no expert knowledge of marijuana's medical or health effects, but they do represent an industry that receives billions of tax dollars to enforce Marijuana Prohibition.


Before the government began promoting reefer madness hysteria during the 1930s, the word marijuana was a Mexican word that was totally absent from the American vocabulary. In the 1930s, Americans knew that hemp was a common, useful, and harmless crop. It is extremely unlikely anyone would have believed hemp was dangerous, or would have believed stories of hemp madness. Thus, the words marijuana and reefer were substituted for the word hemp in order to frighten the public into supporting Hemp Prohibition. Very few people realized that marijuana and hemp came from the same plant species; thus, virtually nobody knew that Marijuana Prohibition would destroy the hemp industry.


Bolstering the theory that marijuana was banned to destroy the hemp industry, two articles were written on the eve of Marijuana Prohibition that claim hemp was on the verge of becoming a super crop. These articles appeared in two well-respected magazines that are still published today. The articles are:


Flax and Hemp (Mechanical Engineering, Feb. 1937)


New Billion-Dollar Crop (Feb. 1938,Popular Mechanics)

This was the first time that billion dollar was used to describe the value of a crop. These articles praise the usefulness and potential of hemp by stating "hemp can be used to produce more than 25,000 products" and "hemp will prove, for both farmer and public, the most profitable and desirable crop that can be grown." Marijuana Prohibition took effect within one year after both these articles were written.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top