By Michael E. Miller
By Ryan Yousefi
By Kyle Munzenrieder
By Sabrina Rodriguez
By Michael E. Miller
By Carlos Suarez De Jesus
By Luther Campbell
By Kyle Munzenrieder
The new federal crackdown on medical marijuana announced on October 7 by the four California U.S. Attorneys sent chills throughout the industry. It was a stunning reversal by the Obama administration.
Only two years ago, Deputy U.S. Attorney General David Ogden wrote his infamous "Ogden Memo," announcing the feds wouldn't bother businesses in compliance with their own state laws. It proved a dose of Miracle-Gro to California, where pot-selling stores multiplied since voters approved the state's 1996 medical marijuana law. By late last year, California reportedly had more dispensaries than Starbucks outlets.
Colorado also made it legal in 2000, seeing a similar explosion of new storefronts. The same thing was happening to varying degrees in 16 states, from Arizona to Washington, New Jersey to Delaware.
But the feds' tolerance wasn't quite what it seemed. While legal weed grew to an estimated $10 to $100 billion industry — no one's quite sure of the exact figure — activists noticed an alarming undercurrent to the rhetoric: Raids on growers and dispensaries actually increased under Obama.
As hundreds of thousands of state-approved, doctor-recommended patients happily bought their medicine in well-lit stores from knowledgeable "budtenders," the ire of cops and prohibitionists rose.
The first sign of Obama's subterfuge came in late 2010, as California prepared to vote on a ballot proposition that would have legalized growing and possessing small amounts of marijuana for anyone over the age of 21. Under pressure from teetotalers — nine former Drug Enforcement Agency chiefs begged Obama to oppose the measure — Attorney General Eric Holder said that it didn't matter what Californians thought. The feds would continue to bust people regardless of the election.
The measure got 46 percent of the vote, but not enough to pass. Yet the medical side of things kept going strong – too strong for Obama.
When the Oakland City Council prepared to authorize large-scale cultivation centers, Melinda Haag, the U.S. Attorney for California's Northern District, issued the first in what would become a series of letters from her fellow attorneys general. She reminded residents — in no uncertain terms — that marijuana was still criminalized under federal law, considered equal to heroin or meth, irrespective of its medicinal value.
Nor did she care what California law said. Her "core priority" would be to prosecute "business enterprises that unlawfully market and sell marijuana" under federal law.
Over the next few months, attorneys general from Maine to Washington wrote their own increasingly menacing letters. In Washington, the feds even threatened to arrest state workers who helped facilitate the industry.
Then the Obama administration released a new letter to "clarify" Ogden's memo. Deputy U.S. Attorney General James Cole verified the about-face: The only people safe from arrest were the "seriously ill" patients and their caregivers.
Everyone else? Be forewarned.
The letter didn't just target those directly involved in the trade. Cole was also threatening supporting industries — read: banks — with money laundering charges for dealing in the proceeds from marijuana. Obama had launched a full-on attack on the industries essential to any functioning enterprise.
Banks responded by canceling their weed-related accounts. "Perhaps there may be a few financial institutions here or there that are still accepting accounts," says Caroline Joy, a spokeswoman for the Colorado Bankers Association. "Those facilities don't want to reveal who they are."
The president's push grew louder last month. The U.S. Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms bureau warned medical-marijuana patients that they couldn't legally use pot and own or buy guns.
Then came a one-two punch.
On October 5, the IRS ruled that one of the largest California dispensaries, Harborside Health Center, owed $2.5 million in taxes because federal law precluded standard deductions for businesses engaging in illegal activity.
In other words, Obama was not only blowing off state laws. He was declaring that legal businesses were now nothing more than criminal rackets. And he was carving away every tool they needed to function.
Harborside's owner said he'd go out of business if the IRS didn't reverse course. Dispensaries nationwide saw it as a crippling decision.
Then came another blow two days later: The bombshell dropped by California's four U.S. Attorneys.
They were now going after people who leased stores and land to the pot industry. Violators were given 45 days to close doors, uproot plants, and kick out renters. The penalty for not acting: Seizure of property and arrest.
Laura Duffy, the U.S attorney from California's Southern District, went so far as to threaten media with prosecution for taking pot advertising. (Disclosure: This newspaper accepts such ads.)
There was no doubt about it: Obama was intent on killing an entire industry – in the middle of a depression, no less. Left unexplained was why, especially since he was giving the finger to voters in 16 states just a year before he would face them in his own election.
Democratic strategists were perplexed. Roger Salazar, a California party consultant, believes the president may be trying to reach out to a broader base. But that doesn't explain the attack on his own base; Democrats support medical marijuana at high percentages. It doesn't even make sense in luring conservatives. With the country in economic tatters, no one has weed high on their radar.
Except one group, says Salazar: "It's a mystery, I think, it really is, where the pressure is coming from. My sense is it's coming from law enforcement."
Certainly Obama's threats are real. He may be loath to jail landlords, bankers or even dispensary owners. Arresting non-violent, state-sanctioned businesspeople wouldn't be popular. But his quieter war of chopping merchants off at the knees through credit and leasing would ravage the trade.
Still, the president has thrown himself into an uphill fight. There is reason to believe medical marijuana will persist, despite his betrayal.
Marijuana really is medicine
Earlier this month, in a timely coincidence, the California Medical Association's board voted to encourage the feds to legalize marijuana.
Though spokeswoman Molly Weedn emphasizes that the decision by the doctors' group hinges on a call for more research, a report studied by the CMA board before its decision makes it clear that — at the least — marijuana shows promise as a medicine.
The CMA's Council on Clinical and Scientific Affairs "has also concluded that components of medical cannabis may be effective for the treatment of pain, nausea, anorexia, and other conditions."
The report goes on to say:
"Cannabinoids are presently thought to exhibit their greatest efficacy when implemented for the management of neuropathic pain, which is a form of severe and often chronic pain resulting from nerve injury, disease, or toxicity.
"The University of California Center for Medicinal Cannabis Research (CMCR) recently reported to the California legislature the results of a number of studies. Four studies involved the treatment of neuropathic pain; and all four demonstrated a significant improvement in pain after cannabis administration."
The doctors note that while using marijuana may contain risks, such as addiction, they argue that its prohibition may be more dangerous than the drug itself:
"Under the current prohibition of cannabis, public health is also affected by increased rates of crime surrounding cannabis cultivation, sale and use. The California Legislative Analyst's Office estimates that the incarceration and parole supervision of cannabis offenders costs the state tens of millions of dollars annually."
Nationally, prohibition burns through billions of dollars in lives lost to the violence inherent in the black market, the incarceration of thousands of productive, non-violent Americans, and the lack of access to a beneficial medicine.
Are lots of people using weed without suffering from a medical problem? Absolutely. But just because you've heard that half or more of patients take the drug for "severe and chronic pain" doesn't mean they're all faking it.
In June, the Institute of Medicine estimated that 116 million Americans suffer from significant, chronic pain.
As more research comes in showing that pot can be an effective treatment, and with America's elderly population exploding in the coming decades, the interest in its medicinal qualities seems only likely to rise.
The truth will prevail
Ignorance, false propaganda and rank political posturing tend to be the foundation of the anti-marijuana argument. (Throw in bureaucratic turf protection as well. The DEA, for example, would need fewer agents if pot was decriminalized nationwide.)
A new Gallup poll shows that a record 50 percent of Americans believe marijuana — and not just the medical kind – should be legalized. The poll follows a continuing trend over the past several years of increasing support for legalization.
Obama has chosen to swim against the tide. But there's reason to believe his fight is about politics, not public safety. If this were about safety, alcohol would be his primary target.
Politics cause both sides to fudge the truth. Yet prohibitionists and the government have been particularly egregious. The government is using taxpayer dollars to prop up its side, with the U.S. Justice Department's 64-page booklet, "Speaking Out About Drug Legalization," being a prime example.
The booklet, distributed in print and online, states that "smoked marijuana is not scientifically approved medicine." Forget that by labeling it a drug on par with heroin, the DEA is curtailing the proper study of marijuana, since it prevents even scientists from possessing it for research. The publicly funded propaganda also flies in the face of the opinion of doctors, who see pot's potential as medicine.
It's a strategy that's trickled to states with functionaries unhappy about executing the voters' will. Last December in Arizona, Will Humble, the state's Department of Health Services director, held a news conference about the state's new Medical Marijuana Act. He took a moment to remind reporters that more than 1,000 Arizonans died last year from accidental overdoses from prescription drugs.
But when asked how many of those died from marijuana, Humble refused to answer — to chuckles from the audience. He referred the question to his chief medical officer, Laura Nelson, who would only say she'd "have to do the research on that" before she could answer.
Then Nelson began stammering about the danger of marijuana due to "car accidents" — though she had done no research on that, either.
The CMA's new report, interestingly enough, sheds light on statements like Nelson's. It says that prohibitionists often make unsubstantiated claims about car crashes or other purported harms. Studies disagree on its risks to motorists, though there's no question that booze increases the chances of a crash, the report says. Moreover, simulated driving tests reveal that pot smokers overestimate their degree of impairment and "compensate effectively."
If one were a cynic, one might also view U.S. Attorney Laura Duffy's threat to target advertising as a less than subtle threat to control the debate.
True: Federal law prohibits advertising illegal drugs. Google, for example, agreed to pay a $500 million fine this summer for taking online ads promoting "rogue" Canadian pharmacies.
But pot dispensaries are legal businesses within their states. Under Duffy's threat, the feds will have their say, while the pro-pot message would be erased from public view.
Kent Scheidegger, legal director for the conservative Criminal Justice Legal Foundation, tells New Times that Duffy's threat gave him the willies.
"They're on much thinner ice going after the newspaper," says Scheidegger, who otherwise believes the feds should enforce its own laws against marijuana. "... Maybe there is a political strategy."
It's called the "shut them up" strategy.
There will be pushback
Federal law is, for now, on the side of the prohibitionists.
Scheidegger downplays the state victories handed to medical marijuana. He says if the American people want to change the law, they need to encourage Congress to do so.
Yet that ignores a basic political reality: It's extremely difficult for any politician to stand up for marijuana. He or she will be quickly painted as pro-pothead.
Like women's suffrage, the medical marijuana movement has — in ten states, anyway — benefited by the direct democracy of citizens initiatives. These elections have taken the pulse of voters in a way that congressional elections cannot.
In six other states and Washington D.C., medical marijuana was legalized by local lawmakers. Other states are bound to vote in favor of decriminalizing pot in the next few years in spite of federal laws.
Phoenix attorney Ty Taber sees it as a major states' rights issue. "Basically, the citizens of these states ... they want marijuana legalized," he says. If Obama wants to play hardball, he says, "You're going to get pushback."
Taber represents Compassion First, a company that helps set up dispensaries. The firm sued Arizona after Governor Jan Brewer, in blatant defiance of voters' wishes, derailed the dispensary portion of Arizona's new law by instructing the Department of Health to reject applications. She simultaneously sued the federal government, asking a judge to rule on whether the state's new law was legal. (Ironically, the U.S. Justice Department's civil department is defending against the lawsuit – and if the feds win, Arizona might just get its first dispensaries.)
Compassion First wants the program implemented as Arizonans intended, and to remove blockades Brewer has thrown in its path. For instance, Arizona requires dispensary owners to have been residents for at least three years.
But the point isn't so much whether or not the company will win its lawsuit or not — it's that they're fighting back, and they're not alone.
Across the country, advocates are returning fire of their own in the court system. Which means Obama won't be able to do battle by the relatively cheap means of letters and threats. He'll likely end up burning through millions of dollars in litigation – money he doesn't have.
Taber thinks the president may have underestimated his foe. "The people behind this marijuana movement — they're committed. They are zealots. And these are smart people — not stoners saying, 'Hey dude, pass another slice of pizza.'"
Half-hearted crackdowns don't work
The latest crackdown will be bad for the pot business. No question. But Obama could be doing much, much more.
He could go after patients. Over the summer, a federal judge ruled the DEA could peek at the names on Michigan's patient registry. Because marijuana is illegal under federal law, said Judge Hugh Brenneman Jr., patients can't expect privacy.
The feds could also hit pot-tolerant cities. The law doesn't allow municipal workers to be jailed in such prosecutions, but cities or counties could be heavily fined just for setting up zoning requirements for dispensaries.
There's a huge downside to that, of course. Obama will only appear mean and small for having sickly grandmas arrested. And fining cities just enrages residents picking up the tab – the very people the president will need a year from now.
All of which leaves him fighting at partial speed. That, in turn, leaves the "zealots" Tyber mentions betting their money and freedom that even if the feds throw the book at some, it won't be them.
Last week, the feds raided several growing operations in California and Oregon, including one in Mendocino County that appeared to be playing by the state rules. But it seems safe to assume that few of the hundreds of other growers in Mendocino County did not uproot their crops in response — just as the hundreds of dispensaries in California did not immediately close their doors after the feds' ominous warning on October 7.
The industry seems to be practicing a form of civil disobedience. And it has tens of thousands of seriously sick people behind it, who will holler loudly if they're forced back to the black market.
Indeed, there are some signs that Obama's crackdown will be what the SF Weekly's Chris Roberts calls a "Passive Aggressive" strategy. Rather than offend Americans with news footage of police raids, Obama has launched a war of attrition.
Landlords, worried the feds will steal their property, will tell dispensaries to move out. Banks won't handle money for pot-themed businesses. Dispensaries will be taxed so heavily they won't be to cover the payroll or pay the electric bill.
Yet it remains to be seen whether federal prosecutors, who undoubtedly have even more serious criminals with which to contend, are willing and able to carry out the threat. When Jack Gillund, Melinda Haag's spokesman, was asked whether her office had the resources to go after every dispensary or grower who doesn't comply with the 45-day deadline, he offered a simple reply: "No comment."
Lauren Horwood, a spokeswoman for U.S. Attorney Benjamin Wagner in California's Eastern District, says Wagner's goal isn't to shut down everything. He's focusing on "large, professional, money-making operations – the commercial operations."
Horwood also says that it's wrong to call it "Obama's crackdown." She says the California U.S. Attorneys decided to take action on their own because the situation has grown out of control among recreational users. But she acknowledges that they received Obama's blessing.
It's classic political strategy: Send the underlings out to take the heat, while the bosses hide under their skirts.
Either way, the end result casts Obama as even more zealous than George W. Bush. Bush threatened owners of dispensary properties in 2007, but never followed up. Meanwhile, Colorado and other states have seen no similar crackdowns. Only time will tell whether Obama plans to destroy the entire medical marijuana industry, or merely smack California around for a bit.
"I'm willing to give the Obama Administration the benefit of the doubt," says Blair Butterworth, a Democratic consultant in Seattle, where about 100 dispensaries operate. "In California, they may be sitting on uncontrollable drug sales. They need to slap some wrists."
It's easy to pick on California, a state known for its excesses. But "the last thing Obama needs right now is to go to war nationally with the medical marijuana community," Butterworth says.
Leniency for marijuana users, medical or otherwise, continues to be a popular Democratic stance, he says. Butterworth is helping the campaign to put outright legalization on the Washington state ballot next year. He thinks it's got a good chance.
Of course, a successful election could just tick off the feds even more.
A million patients can't be wrong
An estimated 1 million people in California have obtained a doctor's recommendation to grow and use marijuana legally.
More than 150,000 medical marijuana patients have registered in Colorado as of July.
Tens of thousands of patients are registered in the other weed-friendly states.
If the feds shut down every dispensary in the country, all these people will still be able to legally possess marijuana — no matter where they bought it — under their state laws.
The only difference is they'll be forced to go back to buying their weed from Mexican drug cartels, rather than Americans who provide jobs and pay taxes.
It's akin to the feds saying that Anheuser-Busch can no longer sell beer; they'd prefer that people only buy from Al Capone.
Hey, wait — didn't something like that happen?
The Drug Abuse Resistance Education sport utility vehicle was at the center of a controversy earlier this year after it was pulled over and New Orleans police discovered marijuana and drug paraphernalia inside on March 8, reports WDSU. ... A memo obtained by the WDSU I-Team shows Sheriff Daniel Edwards sustained the internal affairs
Obama's war on weed...@readers:disqus my best friend's half-sister makes $79 an hour on the laptop. She has been out of work for 9 months but last month her check was $8472 just working on the laptop for a few hours. Go to this web site CashHuge. com
Please idiots STOP all reference to drug testing. That test itself is supposed to be illegal and yes I agree that if ANYONE ought to be tested is Congress etc...
As far as to what is happening here is my thought and I think the proof is in front of all of us. First and foremost it is an illusion to think any governor or president or any politician HAS ANY SAY OR CONTROL OVER OUR SO CALLED POLICE. They are the largest (their unions are anyway) donors (bribers) to BOTH PARTIES AND HAVE BEEN FOR DECADES. NOTE: Last time the law came up for vote the police bought ALL 123 newspapers advertising. They do as they please and will break laws, kill people, steal with complete and utter abandon for they are all above the "law".This all goes back to USA's favorite pass time racism starting around 1935. All of the law enforcement agencies like the DEA, ATF etc. were all set up merely to give jobs during the Depression regardless of the rights of innocent people. The real drug lords are the police. The real terrorists are the police. The real Treasoneers are the police. The budget of our country is out of control NOT due to our wars in other countries but for the phony wars we have right here. In short the USA has failed on all fronts especially to it's own people who are now considered enemies of the state unless they are wealthy. The USA's ONLY working function is to punish severely. Think people. Think hard. Do you REALLY THINK your financial credit score should be affected by one traffic ticket thereby increasing your home mortgage? Be pusihed for years by law enforcement, insurance companies, and FICO? Every criminal sentence handed out is now a virtual life sentence. No the police in our country present a clear and present danger to all Americans and have eliminated freedom from our country and no one will speak out.
I agree with Obama - but only if we begin a 100% - NO EXCEPTION - monthly drug testing program for all federal employees.A major drug problem is with all these 'drug test exempt' government employees. When ALL the federal government employees come up 100% drug free, then we can begin imposing drug policies on those whose earned labor property is confiscated every payday to support these corrupt federal government employees.
Sounds to me that the States have lost the right to rule themselves, that we, the American People have lost our Sovereignty, our Republic, Freedom of Choice, Freedom of Speech due to this socialist dominaring terrany backed by a Communist president. The choice and the freedom to do with our bodies should be our choice as long as we harm no one including ourself. This shows that the large conglomerate corperations have paid because of their wants and desires for profit overrule the public. IT'S TIME TO WAKE UP AND TAKE CHARGE!
America is becoming a land of Psychopathy. Keep up the civil disobedience it is now the only way to make change occur in America. Voting is a joke.
alcohol & cigarettes are the two most major drug problems in the world. shut down businesses, export jobs, lock people up, and fuel the black market. what a bag of assholes we have running this country
Obama allows this because he wants to exert federal power, as do all liberal democrats. Now, the only way for the growers to win the argument is for their states to sue, charging the Feds with usurping powers reserved by the states.
I can't recall which enumerated power gives the feds the authority to regulate crops within a state... or which one allows for the regulation of any drug or intoxicating substance.
It will be interesting to see what alliances begin to form to fight the Obama scourge.
Hard to imagine that conservatives are actually rallying to the defence of marijuana growers and users for ANY reason other than it is another chance to oppose our black President. Were these same right wingers clamoring for the legalization of cheeba when Bush was in office?
I'm caught between my support for legal weed and my belief that states shouldn't flout federal laws. I hope that these crackdowns are followed by a relaxation of federal drug laws.
Cigarettes and alcohol are both drugs,legal and cause much more health problems and deaths than Marijuana ever could,has or will. FACT!!!
Only one reason, competition... The cia,dea,atf,big pharma,and the alcohol and tobacco industrys don't like competition
When did President Obama ever say he was pro weed? Never. Also if you had done a little more research, you would have found out the shops that are threatened to be closed are near schools, which I think is reasonable and I am a super stoner. You should vote for Ron Paul in the Republican Primary though.
hes losing my vote, the president should be the absolute leading voice in democracy, not acting like a snake, im starting to think ron paul is a friend of mine
Obama = hypocritical, puppet mouthpiece for the powers that be !!! POS !It is a silly game at this point. Give something, then take it away. How is that for dysfunction.This is how the gov. works in ALL sectors. DYSFUNCTIONAL ! Time for a new model.THIS ONE SUCKS !!! God help us all. Everyone knows the difference between alcohol and marijuana. I will not get into the details, but that is my point...EVERYONE NOW KNOWS THAT THE CRIMINALIZATION OF POT IS A JOKE. THANKS OBAMA ADMIN. FOR KEEPING OUR FREEDOMS ALIVE AND WELL IN THIS LAND OF THE NOT SO FREE.
The question I've always asked is WHY MARIJUANA ? The only answer that I've beenable to come up with is that the rabid anti-weed mentality is a form of institutionalizedrevenge that was originally aimed at the 60's generation in retaliation for all the hellthat generation raised. It's patently insane to group weed together with heroin and speed.To let the DEA frame the issue in order to justify it's budget is equally alice inwonderland. None of this has anything to do with the properties of the outlawedsubstance itself. If I had a dollar for every ' study ' that's been done since about1966 I'd be quite well off. NONE has found ANYTHING even close to horrible aboutthe actual thing itself. But then this is not about the truth ( I remember one so-calledgovt. ' study ' from the late 60s that claimed smoking weed would cause men togrow breasts ! I mean really ).
Obama, who I supported, apparently gets really bad advice. He could havepicked up somewhere around 20 million votes by leaving this issue alone.He has chosen to crack down instead. I could never bring myself to voterepublican but I can't, after this latest outrage, bring myself to keep supportinghim either. I only have one vote it's true, but he just lost it.
Again, I say and constantly reiterate...legalize marijuana. Get rid of the "prohibition" mentality...it didn't work with alcohol (probably more dangerous). The federal government has spent billions for years fighting the drug cartels. Put them out of the illegal business.. The federal government should make it legal,charge the appropriate taxes and get this country out of debt!
I'm all for legalizing pot, but let's be honest, most "medically" prescribed pot does not end up in the "chronically" pain suffering peoples hands. While not a smoker myself, what's the difference between having a puff or a few beers after work?
Medical marijuana has proven to be beneficial by phsicians for many conditions. When people use it to relieve pain, they're not a "losser DRUG user." Who knows, it might even help you with your grammar and spelling!
If the feds don't fight legal pot, they won't be able to fill up all those prisons they already have and are planning to build. Those prisons are largely managed by private companies. For example, the Geo Group, which is either partly owned by, or has a major stockholder in, guess who? Dick Cheney. Hmmm, I wonder if there's a connection.
Must be part of Obama's anti immigrant policy - keep the war on drugs going until the cartels have killed everyone in Mexico. If you could buy marijuana at 7-11s, the cartels would be gone tomorrow.
I'm a professional and over 40 and have smoked marihuana for years and never has it affected my work or home life. In fact I dont even drink alcohol just dont care for it, all this nonsense that pot leads to stronger drugs is BS.. why dont they say alcohol leads to pot? because just about every household Ive been too has alcohol and it is glamorized on tv 247. I say, LEGALIZE IT once and for all and stop the hypocrisy!
However, the law in question falsely describes the plant in question. You can't have rule of law based on a lie.
The quotes are, "I inhaled frequently" and that "That was the point". see: youtube.com/watch?v=cpBzQI_7ez...
So it's far from never. Also, what's so reasonable about closing regulated pot shops? How far are the convenience and liquor stores, pharmacies and supermarkets? Is marijuana available in those "nearby" schoolyards?
As for research, an end to alcohol prohibition came about thanks to concerned mothers who organized in protest.
The feds are reacting to existing federal laws and the facts marijuana state sanctioned commercialization has skyrocketed. The Ogden memo appears to be their way of trying to soften a little on the issue, but that memo clearly states the feds believe strongly that marijuana sales greatly fund Mexican cartels.
You should focus on helping change policy and the feelings of fellow Americans as concerns enforcement. Thinking a different President would solve this problem is foolish, and then you will have to deal with many other issues on top of this one.
Of course, if you do want to vote for someone else, go ahead. That person and your neighbors should have an idea of why you have strong views against our drug laws as written.
If most states pass pro-pot laws, it should follow that Congress will follow along (regardless of who is pres).
The roots of marijuana illegalization are from well before the '60s; by most accounts, it was largely a tool to take punitive action against Mexicans in the US.
That's not honest at all. All cannabis use is medical, while alcohol damages the liver, brain and other organs.
The Storz and Bickel Volcano vaporizer removes the smoking issue. All that's left is exposing the federal felony false claims, suppression of exculpatory evidence at trial and complicity in trafficking tons of cocaine, heroin and marijuana while arresting users for the very same product.
If you are all for legalizing, you might sue the murderers that pretend pot is lawfully illegal.
Or, have another drink . . .
A licensed physician who EXPERIMENTS with his patients with treatment for any medical ailment that is UNTESTED, and NOT APPROVED by the FDA should have their license revoked. Marijuana has NEVER passed FDA clinical trials, and remains an illegal substance.
Dead on balls accurate, Jesus Lizard... I have never used marijuana, but I have had too many close friends dying of cancer as they under went chemo and couldn't eat or even get out of bed, but one lung full of pot in the morning turned their eating and energy around 180 degrees. I hope I never need it, but I'd like to know it's there if I do and that the jackass in charge isn't trying to KILL the ill in this country.
And yet, it's Messiah Obama that it stopping the legalization.... Hmmmm, bet George Bush held a gun to Messiah Obama's head to make him do it... Or maybe Messiah Obama isn't Mr Wonderful like you all continue to preach to the rest of us that see both parties for what they really are, useless...
Don't take this personal, but to think a drug cartel will just pack up and end their life of crime because Marijuana is available in a 7/11 is foolish. Cartels are going nowhere, they will simply diversify into other crimes, perhaps those more dangerous to US citizens than drug trafficking.
Your ideer sound nice though, maybe if you repeat it enough times, somebody other than you will actually believe it.
Hilarious response... Your assumption that mhepting "must be a Republican" hits at the heart of "Obama can do nothing wrong, it's all the Republicans fault." Being that the one pulling the plug on medical pot facilities is your Messiah himself. You know, Mr. Change? Both parties are useless, but I find you Obama lovers especially ignorant. Now go back to following like the rest of the sheep.
Just curious, but if you have smoked Marijuana for 40 years, how could you possibly know it has not affected your work or home life?
Perhaps without it, you would have achieved greater success than you have now. Perhaps without it, you would have become a doctor and cured cancer. Maybe you would have married a super model. Who knows?
The FACT is, that since you have smoked the stuff for 40 years, you have no idea what the effect Marijuana has had on your life has you never indulged. Your own confession defies logic.
When you abstain, keep in mind that you are allowing the other candidates to gain and potentially become president. We have a government problem at many levels. Your best bet is to convince other voting citizens to support reform or civil protest, but allowing a worse candidate doesn't help too much.
According to the Ogden memo, the US strongly believes that commercial pot is an important source of revenue for Mexican cartels ("marijuana distribution in the United States remains the single largest source of revenue for the Mexican cartels").
When the US marijuana business grew as much as it did recently, how can it be a surprise that the US will have increased raids (and still to only a level a little above the Bush era when the legal market was much smaller)?
A good case can be made to legalize pot under some circumstances or potentially many circumstances (with restrictions for innocent bystanders), but Congress would have to change its laws. It has little to do with Obama.
Exactly how prohibition works, repeat the lies enough times to scare the people into believing they are true.
How do you know he's not a doctor married to a supermodel? You do know that the effect wears off after an hour or so right, your not stoned for life.
Does it really matter what "could have" been? You're under the assumption that his life has turned out unsatisfactory, or not satisfactory enough. For all you and I know he's the happiest man on the face of this planet. Perhaps, he's perfectly overjoyed by the wife he has now and ; and perhaps, his work brings him satisfaction and provides enough for his family. His body is definitely more thankful than those of the so many alcoholics.
Want what you have.
Right, but I live in a state that votes for the dem 100% of the time. So its more just a matter of principle for me. I'd think differently if we had a popular vote instead of the asinine electoral college system, or if I lived in a swing state.
Pay attention and try to follow along...My point is that by USING for 40 years it is IMPOSSIBLE to say that without a doubt, that there are no Ill effects from using. There is no baseline to compare.
Ok, but by that logic, you can't say if anything anyone's ever done has had a positive or negative impact. Was is a good idea to go to college? I don't know, because I can't see a universe where I didn't go to college. Was marrying that supermodel a good idea? Can't tell, because no one knows what would have happened if I didn't. So, in that case, what's your point?
It makes no difference if its 40 years or 40 hours or 40 seconds. Unless there is a parallel universe somewhere with a clone who never used, it is IMPOSSIBLE to tell ANY GOOD OR BAD EFFECT. There is NO BASELINE. Saying otherwise is not entitle you to make up your own facts.
The poster has smoked for an unspecified number of years. There's no reason to believe that s/he didn't establish a baseline prior to smoking for comparison.
When you say that (quote) "have smoked marihuana for years and """never""" has it affected my work or home life", IT MATTERS.