Esquire: Will Obama legalize it?
posted at 9:00 pm on December 23, 2008 by Allahpundit
I’m guessing no. But as with gay marriage, he’s sent enough mixed signals on the subject that his disciples can plausibly tell themselves that he secretly agrees with them and is prepared to act on it when the time is right, but has to lie low for just a bit longer until he’s in a better position politically.
Some of Obama’s biggest financial donors are friends of the legalization movement, St. Pierre notes. “Frankly, George Soros, Peter Lewis, and John Sperling — this triumvirate of billionaires — if those three men, who put up $50 to $60 million to get Democrats and Obama elected, can’t pick up the phone and actually get a one-to-one meeting on where this drug policy is going, then maybe it’s true that when you give money, you don’t expect favors.”…
“I’m hoping that what the administration will do,” [Obama bundler Marsha Rosenbaum] says, “is something this country hasn’t done since 1971, which is to undertake a presidential commission to look at drug policy, convene a group of blue-ribbon experts to look at the issue, and make recommendations.”
But ultimately, Rosenbaum remains confident that those recommendations would call for an end to the drug war. “Once everything settles down in the second term, we have a shot at seeing some real reform.”
I hope it happens, mainly because if Obama’s feeling confident enough to risk this sort of culture war in his second term, it would mean he’d have been so fantastically successful in fixing the economy and detoxifying Pakistan and Iran, among other things, that he had political capital to burn. He had no appetite for the issue during the campaign: When the Washington Times uncovered video in January of him telling an audience in 2004 that he wanted to decriminalize pot, his spokesman turned on a dime and said he wouldn’t support eliminating penalties (but might reconsider jail for first-time offenders). In fact, NORML looked at the odds of an administration rethink on weed just a few weeks ago and found it unlikely given that The One’s surrounded by drug warriors, Biden and Rahm Emanuel most prominently among them. The only way I can imagine them doing it is if Obama moved so far to the center or center-right — perhaps due to foreign-policy exigencies — that he simply had to give the left something to get them off his back. Although that raises the question of under what circumstances he’d ever have to worry about placating the left. They’re not going to hand the White House back to the GOP in 2012, and with all the spending he’ll be doing, they’ll have plenty to keep them happy. Then again, never underestimate the pecular priorities of Obama cultists.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »
And another thing: Weed doesn’t make you dumb, or lazy, or even a hippie. It only looks that way, but it’s quite the opposite. It’s just that hippies, unintelligent people, and lazy people like to smoke weed.
Let’s make some money taxing those people instead of wasting it tracking them down.
Can’t believe I’m saying this, but if Obama pulls this one off (of course he won’t), I might be impressed enough with him to vote for him next time. And I’m a hardcore conservative.
Legalize.
Kevin M on December 24, 2008 at 9:24 AM
Any person whose ever lived with or known an addict knows its starts with marijuana. Then what? Put cocaine back in soda?
Talk about dumbing down America. That stuff makes people lazy and forgetful. This day and age doesnt need people forgetting combinations to things, account numbers, identitites of thieves, whether they dropped off or picked up the kids at school, what day it is, whether the oven is still on, whether they should go to work or school or study for an exam etc etc etc. They sure don’t need it if its laced with something else to get addicted to later on.
The people who voted for him will love the idea. They were probably smokin that crap in the car before they went in to cast their ballot anyway.
johnnyU on December 24, 2008 at 9:28 AM
Thing is, even if Congress went along with this scheme and made Marijuana legal, it wouldn’t do anything except remove FEDERAL penalties. States, Counties, and Communities would still be able to make it’s use or possession a crime and the Feds couldn’t do a damned thing about it.
Witness alcohol. A perfectly legal substance, but there are many “dry” counties where it is illegal to sell or possess, and many towns and cities (I’m looking at you, Utah) where the sale of alcohol is either extremely restricted or banned altogether.
The drug war is a cash cow for many state and local governments and they won’t give that money up without a serious fight.
The issue here is not how harmful drugs may be. It’s the revenue stream that prosecutions enable that is the real issue.
Respects,
AW1 Tim on December 24, 2008 at 9:44 AM
I get high once and a while but legal pot would destroy whats left of this American workforce. The drop out rate in California is already 25%
Firebird on December 24, 2008 at 9:51 AM
There’s a HUGE difference between the war on drugs and gay marriage. It isn’t a societal acceptance thing. When was the last time a cop arrested a gay guy for being gay and having sex? It doesn’t happen.
Cops arrest people for being stoners and smoking weed all the time. Most stoners just want to be able to live free. Most stoners don’t care about ‘acceptance’, they just don’t appreciate being thrown in jail and fined in a free country when they aren’t hurting anyone else.
Decriminalization of drugs isn’t in the same league as gay marriage. . . yet another reason to hate the militant gay movement. . . they give people something absurd to point to as a straw man for any moral argument they are against.
If we start throwing gay people in jail for being gay, then we might have a parallel. Other than that, you just don’t understand what ‘freedom’ means.
This is the same argument as saying that ‘freedom of speech’ doesn’t protect offensive speech. OFFENSIVE SPEECH is the MAIN THING protected by ‘freedom of speech’. Just because you might not use drugs doesn’t mean you should keep someone else from using drugs in their personal pursuit of happiness.
ThackerAgency on December 24, 2008 at 10:02 AM
I say yes. I’m not the kind of conservative that tells other people how to behave.
But…if the government legalized it and taxed it, we’d have BIGGER government. No doubt.
That’s my dilemma.
budorob on December 24, 2008 at 10:05 AM
Some of this may have been said already but here goes anyway…
.
The war on drugs is a failure, because it is not being fought so much as played. Like those video games where you get an infinite number of lives and the bad guys have safe bases and spawn locations; so much about the war on drugs is open to allowing recidivism and continuation.
.
In a real war, citizens who cross over to the other side and fight with that cause against their homeland are treated as traitors, not as low to mid-level criminals.
.
If a real war was killing, maiming, demoralizing and raping our country and especially our young people (as drugs have been doing for years and years), every citizen of any value would be armed and actively “hunting” the army of invaders dealing said destruction.
.
Our cities and towns would be focused on the capture and elimination of those responsible, our borders would be militarized against the flow of invaders (and their drugs), and countries aiding and abetting the invaders would be under siege by our weapons of war… that is what a “war” looks like.
.
If we legalize… at least the “war” part of the problem goes away. That might be something to try, but let’s stop “playing” with the problem because that is not helping at all.
.
The problem with legalizing though is that we will need to legalize everything, or fight a real war on the still illegal stuff. Pot will not satisfy everyone. Example… Alcohol is legal but people risk driving into the danger of a drug hood, and/or jail time to buy crack… All consuming crack. Legalize that one and see what happens.
.
Each drug has it’s allure, and some will be mega-harmful once legalized. Tough problem.
.
I say make the war real, and legalize pot at the same time…
Should be interesting.
RalphyBoy on December 24, 2008 at 10:08 AM
Well, I’m here now.
What the heck Jiabones. You’re another poster I read and respected and you skim one thread and bastardize my screen name and call me a piece of work.
Recap.
I simply stated I would find someplace else to live if the country legalized drugs. I’ve served it for 32 years, I guess I have the right to have my retirement check sent anywhere I please.
I honestly believe legalizing drugs will be bad for the country. My opinion.
I was discussing it and gave some insights about my older brother. This thread went off the deep end throwing a hissy fit and using absurd examples of what “people like me would do if I were in charge”.
They said I wasn’t a true Conservative.
So I just took a break and then came back and said I saw the error of my ways and agreed with them. I said legalize everything. Then they started throwing in the caveats about what should never be legalized. Which was my point to begin with. Most people have some point where they say, you know the government ought to step in here to protect people from themselves. By the end of the conversation we mostly all wished each other Merry Christmas and still parted the evening friendly.
Buttdriver huh? That’s classy. Sorry if having an opinion here on HA that doesn’t agree with the masses makes me such an outsider. I’ve seen you folks treat the trolls better.
Maybe this site really isn’t right for me.
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 10:10 AM
Graduating high school in ’76, I saw a lot of pople change with frequent pot use. All the negative aspects that have been alluded to in this thread are absolutely true. I saw a guy that could have played in the NFL drop out of college after one semester because he liked “herb” too much. It is no more harmless that any other addiction. And that, in itself, is no reason to legalize it.
kingsjester on December 24, 2008 at 10:14 AM
you’re OK hawk, you have others agreeing with you this morning. I’m still of the impression that if someone harms themselves, it isn’t the government’s responsibility. The government only has liability when someone is harming something or someone else.
This should be more of a discussion of what a ‘free’ society should look like than whether or not a drug rises to the level of incarcerating a free person in a free society.
ThackerAgency on December 24, 2008 at 10:14 AM
pople=people
oops!
kingsjester on December 24, 2008 at 10:15 AM
Getting back to the gay thing, gay actually kills – AIDS. Marijuana doesn’t. Yet you don’t hear the argument that homosexuality is a public health hazard. Gay people actually KILL OTHERS with what they do (statistic relevance). Potheads just do nothing.
The argument against pot is that it makes people do nothing. Maybe that is the solution to the congress that can’t stop SCREWING UP everything when they try to ‘do something’.
ThackerAgency on December 24, 2008 at 10:18 AM
RE: Ricky “Roll one” Williams. He’s baaaack.
I always thought the commercial a decade ago was spot on, “Smoke pot, nothing happens.”…and that’s certainly true, your life goes nowhere because all you want to do is get high. Sure, George Soros is a successful dope head, but for every one of those, there are 500 do nada dope heads.
kirkill on December 24, 2008 at 10:21 AM
Texas had sodomy laws up until a few years ago. I recall a case in Houston where two gay men were arrested in their own home!
I think you are just too young to realize that this stuff still happens.
My big issue with legalizing the stuff is that today’s pot is very different than yesterday’s pot. It’s stronger and more dangerous (not sure why).
Other than that, I say legalize the stuff and tax the hell out of it.
pullingmyhairout on December 24, 2008 at 10:23 AM
That’s pretty much what it all boils down to. Everyone has some kind of limit where they want the legalization to stop. Some people still want alcohol to be illegal, some want cocaine to be legal.
Your personal limit doesn’t make you a bad person, or a false conservative.
BadgerHawk on December 24, 2008 at 10:26 AM
Me too, Loyalsock Township Class of 76.
It was actually pretty humorous last night. SWMBO got up to see what I was chuckling to myself about in the computer room.
Funny though, the more you post, you find that folks who you tend to agree with 90 percent of the time can throw you under the bus over one issue and folks you generally disagree with you can have quite nice exchanges with. If it’s one of your lynchpin issues like abortion or drugs with me, I really don’t know how I’d reconcile my differences.
For what it’s worth, I try my damnedist to not get personal first.
Anywho, back to work if I want to escape this office today.
Merry Christmas to everyone.
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 10:26 AM
Only if an infected gay man is running around raping people. Otherwise it’s two consenting adults engaging in a private act. Stopping them from ‘harming themselves’ is no different than stopping pot smokers from harming themselves by making it illegal.
And in places like Africa the heterosexual transfer rate is higher than the homosexual rate, so your entire argument is kind of silly.
BadgerHawk on December 24, 2008 at 10:31 AM
My bad. Happy Hanukkah 09 to whoever celebrates the Jewish Holiday too.
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 10:37 AM
Pot is a gateway drug because the same dude who sells it also probably sells other stuff too.
If it was sold in the liquor store, the the drug dealer is stuck trying to convince people to buy his crap when they have something legal and much more enjoyable available to them.
I am very much a social conservative, but I say legalize it from a federal standpoint, let the states decide, and the feds can help by going after illegal importers and folks who are smuggling it into “dry” states (when the state cops ask for help).
That would be “federalism”.
Spartacus on December 24, 2008 at 10:39 AM
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 10:26 AM
Thomasaur’s around our age, too. Hope you can get off early to be with your family on this Sacred Night.
kingsjester on December 24, 2008 at 10:40 AM
Gee, who would have guessed that the same guy supporting homosexuality is wishing everyone Happy Hannukkah. How about letting us Christians enjoy our own holiday? Jews don’t need our help enjoying theirs, and we don’t need theirs to enjoy ours, other than for them to stop suing us over trees and nativity scenes.
And yes, being gay kills. It takes about 30 years off of a mans life.
Spartacus on December 24, 2008 at 10:43 AM
“Witness alcohol. A perfectly legal substance, but there are many “dry” counties where it is illegal to sell or possess”
by AW1
It’s only illegal to sell alcohol in ‘dry’ areas. Trust me, I live in one. There is no home in America where it is illegal to possess alcohol.
Kevin M on December 24, 2008 at 10:47 AM
But isn’t that their decision, not yours? You can’t be for letting someone take years off their life by smoking pot and against letting someone take years off their life by being gay.
FWIW, though, I like the federalism approach to pot also.
BadgerHawk on December 24, 2008 at 10:47 AM
What? Was that directed at me again?
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Over the last 3 or 4 decades pot has been bred up just like domestic corn or cotton have been improved over the years.
Pot is now much more powerful than before.
Speakup on December 24, 2008 at 10:49 AM
Pot’s illegality has severely distorted its natural market. When the risk of each transaction to both consumer and supplier is (um) high, the potency increases accordingly. That’s why crack replaced cocaine. And also why moonshine was a jagillion proof during Prohibition.
The very War on Drugs has made them more dangerous. Whodathunkit.
Cuffy Meigs on December 24, 2008 at 10:56 AM
Yeah. You seem to be drawing a lot of fire in this thread. I think he may have meant it for me but got the hawks messed up.
BadgerHawk on December 24, 2008 at 10:56 AM
I don’t understand you, Hawkdriver. Conservatism is mostly about minimizing the effects of government on our lives. Being conservative, it is crystal clear to me that the government should not be involved in how we harm ourselves (drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, gross food like liver, dangerous sports, etc.) provided that they don’t cause harm to other people.
Let’s face it. Potheads will smoke pot, legal or not. People who realize what a waste of time the stuff is will not smoke pot, legal or not. Why not make money off of them, instead of giving the money to Columbian crime lords?
Kevin M on December 24, 2008 at 10:59 AM
Merry Christmas KJ,
Class of ’75 Rio Linda Senior High
thomasaur on December 24, 2008 at 11:00 AM
“Let’s face it. Potheads will smoke pot, legal or not.”
This is the same argument used for giving condoms to 13 year olds.
Spartacus on December 24, 2008 at 11:01 AM
“It’s only illegal to sell alcohol in ‘dry’ areas. Trust me, I live in one. There is no home in America where it is illegal to possess alcohol.”
There are dry cities in Alaska. Probably some Indian villages in the lower 48 too.
Spartacus on December 24, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Sorry, all these darn “hawks”, killing my speed reading.
Spartacus on December 24, 2008 at 11:04 AM
Ah! Still, not sure this is a great place for someone like me to blog anymore. Think I’ll take me a ManlyMan self imposed exile. (Miss that guys posts)
FWIW Spartacus I wished both Merry Christmas and Happy Hanukkah 09. Our Jewish Chaplain used to wish us both also. I always thought it was nice. I know there are liberal Jews but it’s my sister faith and the foundation of mine. What’s the harm in respecting each other’s holiday. Wait. Don’t answer. I’m not going to stick around to read it.
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 11:05 AM
No. The first case is free adults choosing what they do. The second is children. Not one pro-legalization commenter here has said children should be able to buy drugs…or alcohol for that matter.
Cuffy Meigs on December 24, 2008 at 11:06 AM
We’re crafty like that.
BadgerHawk on December 24, 2008 at 11:06 AM
The bottom line is that barry is only the president-elect not the king-elect. He cannot legalize or de-criminalize marijuana use by edict. His job is to sign laws that have been passed by the Congress not make laws.
thomasaur on December 24, 2008 at 11:06 AM
thomasaur on December 24, 2008 at 11:00 AM
Merry Christmas, buddy.
Wooddale High School ’76
God Bless Us, Everyone.
kingsjester on December 24, 2008 at 11:07 AM
Okay, last one for real.
Can’t make it any plainer.
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 11:07 AM
And Merry Christmas to you Madison, FloatingRock and even you Hawk.
Knucklehead on December 24, 2008 at 11:09 AM
I thought you were talking about graft.
Vashta.Nerada on December 24, 2008 at 11:10 AM
And “even” you Hawk? What is that, something you’re scraping off a plate to me?
Oh gee thanks.
You really have no discernable manners. If you’re going to wish someone a Merry Christmas, don’t do it as an insult.
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 11:14 AM
ThackerAgency on December 24, 2008
I don’t believe I specifically mentioned the “war on drugs”. My comment was in reference to the similarity in attitude of the gay marriage crowd and the legalize drugs crowd. They strive to legalize/legitimize behavior that is arguably not beneficial to society so that they can feel better about their behavior because it is now “normal”.
SKYFOX on December 24, 2008 at 11:20 AM
I do see a lot of “legalize than tax it” arguments here. The only problem is, that wont kill the black market. Once you get the Government to tax it, the underground will just sell it cheaper and more potent.
If you make pot legal and not the others, we will have a different drug war…..between addicts. Those who want their Meth and Heroin legalized too. If you legalize one, you should legalize them all.
You could say “well the harder drugs should be by prescription and made/sold by pharmacies”. Again, why when you can get it cheaper off the street without needing a prescription? Not to mention those that OD on the stuff, then you have lawsuits against the drug companies for selling what they know is a “harmful product”.
Which is why drug companies probably would never sell/make it, or put a high premium on it to cover litigation costs.
I find it odd a lot of you think the Government can take care of this correctly but not anything else. Plus, Obama can’t legalize this without approval from Congress and Senate.
I’m just not sure Libertarians have thought this out enough. There are so many implications to this. Much of them not very apparent, but a few I’ve mention here.
Look at all the drugs already legalized. People can’t handle their booze, but you expect them to handle this stuff? Just my two cents.
Jesse on December 24, 2008 at 11:21 AM
“Let’s face it. Potheads will smoke pot, legal or not.”
This is the same argument used for giving condoms to 13 year olds.
Spartacus on December 24, 2008 at 11:01 AM
You’ve convinced me. Let’s make condoms available to anyone who wants one. Clearly if they want one, they plan to have sex. But that’s no reason to hand them out, much like there’s no reason to hand out weed. Make them ask for condoms, and make them be over 18 before throwing their lives away smoking weed.
Kevin M on December 24, 2008 at 11:31 AM
“Can’t make it any plainer.
hawkdriver on December 24, 2008 at 11:07 AM”
Ok, then you will be missed.
Kevin M on December 24, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Putting aside personal liberty issues for a moment, pot, cocaine, crystal meth, and heroin are generally speaking productivity killers on a massive scale. That’s why the govt won’t legalize them. Alcohol, though problematic, doesn’t have the amotivational effects of pot, or the higher addictive qualities of coke, meth, or heroin.
Paul-Cincy on December 24, 2008 at 11:34 AM
how would they tax it ?
most already pay a tax on the equipment and Ferts they need to grow pot.
being its a weed its pretty easy to grow but it takes skill to grow it good and strong.
If the feds would stop violating the 10th amendment and allow the states to decide for themselves with out having some interstate commerce law over ruling the constitution. Then this would be a mute point.
also the scraps from each crop could be used for other things like paper products bio fuels ect .
Mojack420 on December 24, 2008 at 11:35 AM
And we’ll make some money off of the potheads, Hawkdriver. It’s win-win, because you’ll probably be living on some Carribean island (not Jamaica, obviously), enjoying the good life, and we’ll be enjoying the fact that America no longer supports drug lords and (if we legalize them all) terrorists.
Everyone will be happy! Woohoo! It’s a brand new day.
Kevin M on December 24, 2008 at 11:36 AM
Ah, the “greater good” and “for the good of society”. Neocons love their socialist, big government crap when it comes to forcing standards down others’ throats.
lodge on December 24, 2008 at 11:39 AM
Jeezus guy! If you’ve served for 32 years then I friggin’ know that you’ve heard worse said about you to your face. Don’t let a little snippy verbal interplay make you run for cover. People are passionate about their issues and take to heart what anyone says. This is exactly what you’ve served your 32 for, people speaking their minds and telling you what they think. When it’s in a forum like this people will sometimes say things that they wouldn’t ordinarily say just because of the anonymity. Suck it up, you can always reply or just ignore the snark but don’t give up. I like your posts, don’t always agree with them but I like to hear what you think because it make me think.
Oldnuke on December 24, 2008 at 11:45 AM
Too many posters here seem to think that conservatives aren’t real conservatives unless they believe what libertarians believe. But conservatism isn’t just about limited government, it’s also about conserving American ideals e.g. freedom, justice, and truth. Part of our freedom is that we as a people decide what is good or moral for our society. The majority rules in that case as long as the laws are Constitutional.
Hawkdriver believes it would be harmful to our society and I agree. I think it should only be legal for medical reasons if at all and that should be decided by the states. I see no benefit for legalizing pot or other drugs besides medically for people who have glaucoma or cancer.
Alcohol and tobacco are harmful as well (except for studies showing benefits w/ moderate intake of wine), but they have long been a tradition in our country. Tradition is also a consideration in making laws.
Maybe someday pot will be legal everywhere, but for now I’d vote no.
drflykilla on December 24, 2008 at 11:48 AM
Which only makes it safer.
FloatingRock on December 24, 2008 at 11:53 AM
merry Christmas atheist dog!!
right4life on December 24, 2008 at 11:57 AM
I understand your comparison but it is a faulty one. Most stoners don’t care what people think of them. . . they just don’t want to be arrested and thrown in jail.
While sodomy used to be punishable by law, pot still IS. Homosexual activity has killed many more people than pot has.
I guarantee you that pot smokers don’t care that people think their choice is bad. They don’t ask for acceptance as a part of the norm. They ask that you don’t throw them in jail unless they risk harm to the society.
I’d like to be able to tell a cop details of a crime with a joint in my hand. I’d like to be able to help a cop solve a crime without worrying about whether or not a cop is going to punish me for merely talking to him while possessing something that someone said was illegal in the 1930′s.
I understand your gay analogy, but it is wrong. Pot smokers don’t want acceptance. They just don’t want to be arrested. Gay people in general don’t have that concern in America.
ThackerAgency on December 24, 2008 at 11:57 AM
Nonsense. We’re a Republic and we chose that system of govt to prevent the tyranny of the majority
lodge on December 24, 2008 at 11:59 AM
and that is your right but in calif we voted to legalize pot for medical reasons but since the feds keep pot as a Schedule I . they have chosen to over rule the will of the people of CA ,to impose their will in clear violation of the 10th amendment all under the guise of the interstate commerce act.
I smoke I grow I even went to collage to get my ba in agriculture . Those who think pot some how stunts mental capacities and makes people lazy , that really depends on what type your smoke if it has under gone the change from harvesting later and the THC has turned to cnb which is a far more narcotic and relaxing high then say a sativa that’s more cerebral and energizing
Mojack420 on December 24, 2008 at 11:59 AM
The law was recently created (less than 80 years ago). George Washington grew pot. It has many uses. Unfortunately the scientific community can’t study it because ‘American ideals’ prohibit the study for understanding of a natural plant. . . a plant that God gave mankind dominion over.
ThackerAgency on December 24, 2008 at 11:59 AM
Why not, when the economy is on the skids, let’s all get stoned. It will make us feeeel better and that is what really matters, isn’t it?
Mr. Joe on December 24, 2008 at 12:00 PM
A better idea is to flush money down a toilet and claim it is for your own good by policing a naturally occurring plant.
You got a great idea though, keep it illegal and forego the revenue from taxation and savings from not needing to police it. The government can tax the non-pot smoking community to make up the deficit in government spending.
Debt to deeper debt. . . is that what matters? because that’s what the war on drugs gets America.
ThackerAgency on December 24, 2008 at 12:04 PM
thats why obama was elected!!!
right4life on December 24, 2008 at 12:12 PM
they should legalize drugs that are good for ya!!!
Steroids
growth hormone
testosterone
Ask BARRY BONDS!!!
right4life on December 24, 2008 at 12:13 PM
Pot, cocaine, heroin and many other drugs considered harmful are illegal. They can all be purchased more or less openly just about anywhere. They are apparently used by a large portion of the U.S. population including our president elect, the present sitting president and his predecessor. Although Billy Jeff says he didn’t inhale. The government, in it’s infinite wisdom spends billions of our hard earned tax dollars on It’s “War on Drugs.” This so called war is obviously a miserable failure and yet the tactics and strategy remain the same. Our prisons are filled with people who are involved in this war, our courts are backlogged with small time cases involving people involved in this war. All of this is funded by more of our tax dollars. The only answer that the DEA, ATF, FBI and other various and sundry law enforcement agencies can come up with is “Give us more of money to throw at this problem.” The rewards of illegal drugs apparently outweigh the risks and penalties by a large margin. I don’t know what the answer is but I do know prohibition doesn’t work. Anyone who thinks making something illegal prevents it’s acquisiton is a blind fool. Now if legalization is not the answer and making it illegal doesn’t work what is the answer? Feel good actions and moralization aside would making the drugs legal and regulated cause more problems than their prohibition?
Oldnuke on December 24, 2008 at 12:24 PM
Marijuana is much less addictive, dangerous than alcohol.
“gateway” drug. That’s hilarious. Give me a break. It’s a gateway drug as much as caffeine in my coffee is.
(no, I’m not a stoner)
I just think making a weed illegal is silly.
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 12:27 PM
If Obama legalizes Marijuana he will be the greatest president in History – and that includes the future. Forget Lincoln and Washington – President Obama will be the greatest president EVER !!!!!!!!!!!!!
LODGE4 on December 24, 2008 at 12:29 PM
legalize the weed.
and make more laws against ridiculous Pharmaceutical sp? companies. Talk about chemicals killing people and getting people addicted! sheesh
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 12:31 PM
You have no idea how much im going to have to smoke just to deal with 4 years of PEBO.
Mojack420 on December 24, 2008 at 12:31 PM
Mojack420 on December 24, 2008 at 12:31 PM
lol..now I understand the 420 in your name
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 12:32 PM
I count too high a number of drug-addled flotsam and drunks in my own family to be alarmed at the numbers who frequent this site. I’ve learned that it’s useless to try to help them and I damned sure don’t care about the ones I’m not related to. You don’t need me to preach to you about self-destruction with the chemical of your choice and I don’t need you to tell me what a good idea that is. Neither of us is buying it.
As long as you stay off the fargin roads when you’re high or drunk, so be it. Just live with the fact it’s illegal. To me, that still counts for something.
SKYFOX on December 24, 2008 at 12:54 PM
With an 82% approval rating, he could put the legalization in the economic stimulus package to tax it to increase revenue to try to save capitalism from trickle up socialism but doubt he will.
getalife on December 24, 2008 at 1:00 PM
To expand on this point: MJ and alcohol may not have much in common, but they do in one regard. While Whiskey may be far more potent than beer, it doesn’t allow you to get any drunker than beer. Quicker, yeah, but not drunker.
The same is true of potent MJ, although unlike alcohol, taking too much too fast doesn’t kill you, it just puts you to sleep.
FloatingRock on December 24, 2008 at 1:03 PM
And the reason this makes it safer is because you don’t have to smoke as much.
FloatingRock on December 24, 2008 at 1:12 PM
They might as well legalize most (if not all) currently illegal recreational drugs. First of all, people are going to use them anyway, and the way it is now, this fuels non-victimless crimes, violent gang activity and smuggling/violence/human trafficking across our southern border. It also causes our police forces to waste money and manpower chasing after harmless junkies while their actual duty to protect and serve is often neglected.
If we legalize these drugs, then slap a sin tax on them and make users register (to prevent users of certain substances to enjoy driving privileges, for example) and only allow people to buy a certain amount each month, it could do a lot to straighten out our economy and clean up our cities.
While we’re on the subject, though, I would say that it makes much less sense to me to legalize marijuana than it does to legalize cocaine, methamphetamine or heroin. Marijuana stays in your system ten times longer than most drugs, and it can heavily impair driving ability (more so, in my experience, than alcohol). This makes it a public hazard that is difficult to regulate. With the other drugs I mentioned, users would only be putting their own health at risk. Furthermore, if those drugs were taken out of the hands of street gangs and foreign cartels and back behind the counters of pharmacies, users would be at highly reduced personal risk.
Sign of the Dollar on December 24, 2008 at 1:35 PM
We already legalized theft a long time ago…. Of course, it’s only legal for the government (and the pressure groups abusing the system).
Sign of the Dollar on December 24, 2008 at 1:59 PM
What’s your point? In a free country, which this is supposed to be, citizens ought to have the right to do harm to themselves if they choose to. Otherwise, you’re asking them to sacrifice their interests to the interests of the state.
Sign of the Dollar on December 24, 2008 at 2:04 PM
Yes, probably less DUIs, because those who smoke MJ, tend to stay home, not go out. However alcohol is a social drug, and people after drinking it, often then drive somewhere. Alcohol is far worse anyways for a driver than MJ, and it is legal. People tend to go go smoke a joint then go boat, they usually have beer then boat.
All I was talking about was MJ, not all drugs. You seem to have this constant habit of intellectual dishonesty in this entire thread, often trying to turn peoples arguments into something completely different than there original argument, as some kind of exercise in strawman lunacy.
And then your silly and uttery inept arguments regarding MJ being like Meth. Some of us have lost a family member to Meth. Meth kills, it is harmful, and it is physically addictive. It fried my dads brain, as it can anyone who is addicted to it. You ever seen your dad so paranoid that he thinks people are up in the attic spying on us, or that every car parked outside at night as people watching us?
Thats what Meth does. So quit being such an idiot, bringing up Meth as some analogy to MJ just because you are woefully uninformed on the differences and unable to put together a coherent idea or argument on the matter.
firepilot on December 24, 2008 at 2:04 PM
hawkdriver on December 23, 2008
Because the ‘war on drugs’ has done such GOOD for society???
huge amounts of money wasted, gangs formed, people dying, just to get away from the cops….yeah, great idea.
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 2:23 PM
If the decriminalization of marijuana could cause you to say that, you aren’t a real American now, as far as I am concerned.
This is what real Americans believe: we hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
If someone was pursuing his happiness in his living room by toking, getting drunk, eating some tacos deep-fried in trans fat, and watching the Vikings fumble away a potential win against the Falcons last Sunday, that affected your pursuit of happiness how exactly? If it did, it was because you are a busy-body nanny-stater who doesn’t like the thought that other people in the US are doing things that don’t meet your approval.
Would you like to make the argument that such Leftists are real Americans?
Bizarro No. 1 on December 24, 2008 at 2:29 PM
has anyone ever o.d from mj?????
I don’t think so .
the law to begin with was insain you have to have a tax stamp to grow mj but you couldn’t grow it with out having the stamp and you couldnt get the stamp unless you grew it .
as far as the gov mj they dispense its utter garbage.
once again this proves the privet sector works far better then the gov.
MJ is stronger because people have back crossed and hy-breed the best for higher thc production taste , smell and hardiness.
and those who are so apposed because its illegal , then please explain to me why mj is classified a stage 1 drug ?
unlike every other drug where you can still get it via a prescription. pot on the other hand is almost impossible to get a prescription for you and if you do , you are forced to smoke the gov garbage weed ,which makes Mexican brown look like northern calif green.
Mojack420 on December 24, 2008 at 2:35 PM
hawkdriver, for a guy who claims to have been in the service for 32 years, you come off as sort of a petulant child in this thread.
dakine on December 24, 2008 at 2:40 PM
Hey hawkdriver, I’m sorry I had to leave this thread yesterday. I would’ve stayed to combat the marijuana is not as bad as alcohol crowd,” but I had things to do.
I have a science (biophysics and cell biology) background and based on my quick review of the literature (and the summary from the National Institutes of Health that I linked to earlier) it seems pretty clear that marijuana has a much more profound affect on things like memory and perception/senses than does alcohol. (Whatever one’s ‘reflexes’ are, if you are stoned, your judgment is impaired and your focus is elsewhere… pieces of shiny paper becoming interesting, for pity’s sake… I’d never get in the car with someone who’s been smoking weed.) From experience from my college days and later as a professor, I know first hand that marijuana use leads to a lack of motivation and focus that is much more debilitating to a student than the typical person’s response to alcohol. Marijuana is processed differently and its effects last longer than alcohol so really there’s no comparison. (BTW, to the person who based their view that MJ is not dangerous because it’s a beautiful plant — c’mon. Did you ever take an organic chemistry class? A natural product can kill you just as quickly as one distilled or synthesized in a lab.)
And I agree with my fellow Californian who pointed out that our workers out here are bad enough without having any residual motivation they have sucked out of them by marijuana.
It’s fine to debate whether or not being “conservative” means adopting a laissez-faire to “private” behavior. I enjoy an intellectual exercise as much as the next person. But from a practical standpoint, the notion that legalizing marijuana won’t have negative effects on society seems silly. It will. My dad worked for four decades in the criminal justice system, first with juveniles, then with adult cons. His observation, and my own from a much more limited experience, is that marijuana is a gateway drug. Another distinction from alcohol.
Make marijuana available for medical uses. Fine. People take drugs like taxol that are deadly without proper use all the time — under medical supervision. That has nothing to do with legalizing the drug for recreational use.
I hope you will stay on Hot Air, hawkdriver. Sorry I wasn’t here last night to add my voice to yours.
Merry Christmas. And thanks for your decades of service!
Y-not on December 24, 2008 at 2:42 PM
I’d imagine that the people who are so opposed to legalization have never smoked it.
I smoked it back in the day–ah, college life. Didn’t make me forgetful. Didn’t make me dumb. Didn’t get ‘hooked’. Didn’t become a ‘gateway’ to other drugs. Didn’t do much of anything but get me a little high. And sometimes helped me stay up late to study for exams. I never got tired like most people seem to claim.
Although, I wasn’t one to smoke a dozen bonghits either. A hit or two would do.
I cannot say the same for alcohol. Talk about making people stupid! All I have to do is show you some posts I’ve made on HotAir after a few glasses of wine. lol~
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 2:49 PM
Marijuana doesn’t make people stupid.
Stupid people smoking too much marijuana are stupid to begin with.
Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 2:51 PM
yeah, it’s funny how the anti-marijuana folks are often pro-gun and pro-alcohol
lodge on December 24, 2008 at 2:53 PM
I don’t get why everyone thinks they can save others from themselves.
If someone is going to overeat, they’re going to be obese.
When people turn 21..they can buy alcohol. What next? Get an alcohol card, and you are only allowed to buy so many ounces a month?
Every BODY is different. And people need to be responsible for themselves.
Get the government OUT of the business of playing Mommy to adults.
Is someone drives while intoxicated, lock ‘em up and take their license away. Why should mary jane be any different?
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 3:08 PM
Were you high when you put that post together?
Anyway, it’s not hard at all to get a prescription for marijuana in California. I’ve never enjoyed that particular substance, but I’ve known plenty of people who use it. They seem to think the medicinal weed is really high quality stuff. Otherwise, they wouldn’t go through the trouble and expense of obtaining prescriptions when it’s so easy to procure street weed illegally.
Sign of the Dollar on December 24, 2008 at 3:12 PM
I think DUIs are the key to finding a rational answer to the question of why alcohol should be legal (but regulated) while marijuana is almost completely illegal.
Both alcohol and marijuana can impair a driver enough to make them a threat to others on the road. Obviously, different people have different tolerance levels, but most people aren’t going to be safe drivers if they’re drunk or stoned enough.
Here’s where it gets tricky. If someone gets loaded on alcohol on Saturday night, it will be out of his system by Sunday afternoon. So if he’s sober on Sunday night, but drops a contact lens and swerves and a cop pulls him over and makes him take a sobriety test, he won’t get screwed with a DUI.
Let’s say the same driver toked up on Saturday night and stayed home on his couch watching cartoons and eating cookies. From that point, he could go four weeks without using anymore marijuana, but if he gets pulled over and takes a sobriety test, the weed could still be in his system and he could get hit with a DUI – despite not having actually driven under the influence.
Until we’ve got a more reliable way to test people for the influence of marijuana, it will be tricky to legalize it and concurrently lock people up who endanger others by driving while high.
Sign of the Dollar on December 24, 2008 at 3:22 PM
So outlawing a natural occuring non-narcotic plant, and devoting billions to jailing people who partake it in, is in keeping with American ideals and the vision of our country?
Utter Bollocks. Can you find us anywhere that our founding fathers criminalized MJ as part of the birth of our country and constitution? No you cant.
And part of preserving our freedom is to take away freedom for those who want to smoke pot, even though it was legal for most our countries history, and our founding fathers did partake in it?
However, you can find modern day politicians, yes the same ones helping screw everything else up, that have it in their visions of their ideals of big government in our lives, which is vastly different from the views of those who founded our country.
firepilot on December 24, 2008 at 3:25 PM
Right now, this very instant marijuana is illegal and widely available. Will it be any more available if it were legal and regulated? I’m not advocating it’s legalization I’m just asking a question. What would change if it were legalized?
Oldnuke on December 24, 2008 at 3:32 PM
“Too many posters here seem to think that conservatives aren’t real conservatives unless they believe what libertarians believe. But conservatism isn’t just about limited government, it’s also about conserving American ideals e.g. freedom, justice, and truth. Part of our freedom is that we as a people decide what is good or moral for our society. The majority rules in that case as long as the laws are Constitutional.
drflykilla on December 24, 2008 at 11:48 AM”
Yes, doctor, it’s not just about limited government. It’s about freedom too. But you are making my point for me. Free the potheads and let America generate cash from them.
Kevin M on December 24, 2008 at 3:37 PM
They seem to be able to do it now somehow. Legalizing it wouldn’t change anything as far a DUI testing goes.
Oldnuke on December 24, 2008 at 3:42 PM
Generate cash why? To fund an even bigger government?
lodge on December 24, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Sign of the Dollar on December 24, 2008 at 3:22 PM
Good question, but I’m thinking there are ways to tell if someone is high RIGHT NOW as opposed to 2 weeks ago. I find it hard to believe we couldn’t find a way.
Oldnuke on December 24, 2008 at 3:32 PM
I wouldn’t have to spend my taxpayer money on holding people for having a joint on them…the war on drugs…
money could be used to actually do some good out there…
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 3:52 PM
Yeah, that’s kind of the way I see it too. I think most people who are opposed to legalization are too hung up making moral judgments to think about the reality. I lived in a dry county in Kentucky many years ago. I bought my beer in a neighboring county as did everyone else. The people who kept the county dry were the baptists and bootleggers. The baptists reasoning was they didn’t want to see all the drunk drivers that legalization would bring. They bought their beer in a neighboring county too, but felt guilty about it. The bootleggers motive is obvious. Said county had the hightest DUI rate in the state. The county has since gone wet and guess what county revenue is up and DUIs are down.
Oldnuke on December 24, 2008 at 4:06 PM
Oldnuke on December 24, 2008 at 4:06 PM
yep..the old…Unintended consequences.
Thing is…law enforcement gets so much $$ for this war on drugs…they would fight this tooth and nail, I’m sure.
Someone’s got to give them reason to see they could make more money GROWING it than trying to stop the dealing of it illegally…..
but, then, I don’t know jack. I’m just spoutin’ off at the mouth. :)
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 4:16 PM
Free the potheads and let America generate cash from them.
Generate cash why? To fund an even bigger government?
lodge on December 24, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Good point :(. Has anyone figured out a way to do that lockbox thing Gore was so in love with yet? Maybe pass a law that all taxes collected from drug sales go directly towards buying back T-bills?
If not, I have to concede your point, Lodge.
Kevin M on December 24, 2008 at 4:21 PM
Free the potheads and let America generate cash from them.
Generate cash why? To fund an even bigger government?
lodge on December 24, 2008 at 3:50 PM
Cash. Less they have to take from MY paycheck, or make me pay when I go through a toll booth….
Cash. Give us straight people a break. No need for more govt. Less need. Let the taxes I DO pay go straight to serious police work….or let the money FUND the police without taxing me.
Am I just too simple minded here?
bridgetown on December 24, 2008 at 4:28 PM
……legal are not, personally I will need something for the next four damn years.
try again later on December 24, 2008 at 4:39 PM
firepilot on December 24, 2008 at 4:41 PM
Will try this again
Also probably they figured they had less chance of seeing each other in the store buying beer.
You know when the only time Baptists do not wave and say hi to each other? When they run into each other in the liquor store.
firepilot on December 24, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next »