Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Time)   While threatening to bypass Congress with his mighty pen to get what he wants, when it comes to reforming marijuana laws, he says, "Uh, that's Congress's job"   (swampland.time.com) divider line 285
    More: Dumbass, Obama, congresses, marijuana laws, spillover effect, White House Office  
•       •       •

1500 clicks; posted to Politics » on 31 Jan 2014 at 9:10 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



285 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-01-31 05:47:44 PM  
Penn Jillette's thoughts. Link (NSFW language)
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-01-31 05:59:10 PM  
He's already rewriting marijuana laws, like allowing banks to participate in felony conspiracy to manufacture and distribute drugs and launder money.
 
2014-01-31 06:08:49 PM  
This is one of the areas where I agree with the states' rights crowd. The feds should GTFO of the way on this.
 
2014-01-31 06:18:43 PM  
It's almost like he's recognizing there are some things he can do as president and some things he can't.
 
2014-01-31 06:30:11 PM  

enry: It's almost like he's recognizing there are some things he can do as president and some things he can't.


He's not going to try to change the law on marijuana because he doesn't want to. He's not going to ask the DOJ to back off medical marijuana dispensaries. He's not going to ask the DEA to look into changing anything. He'll say some pablum like marijuana is no worse than alcohol, but is he going to say to the nation "and it's time we stop sending people to prison for using a drug that I personally believe is no worse than alcohol." And why should he? People like you will give him a pass on that. I mean, if the President really believes marijuana is no worse than alcohol, how can he live with himself seeing millions of Americans have their lives ruined without doing anything more than making some statement?
 
2014-01-31 07:03:41 PM  

Nabb1: He's not going to ask the DOJ to back off medical marijuana dispensaries.


Why would he ask them to do something they're already doing?
 
2014-01-31 07:19:20 PM  
Does the DEA have the authority to change marijuana's classification out of schedule I or does that require an act of congress. I heard, years ago, that it was the latter. Is that incorrect?
 
2014-01-31 07:33:57 PM  

Nabb1: enry: It's almost like he's recognizing there are some things he can do as president and some things he can't.

He's not going to try to change the law on marijuana because he doesn't want to. He's not going to ask the DOJ to back off medical marijuana dispensaries. He's not going to ask the DEA to look into changing anything. He'll say some pablum like marijuana is no worse than alcohol, but is he going to say to the nation "and it's time we stop sending people to prison for using a drug that I personally believe is no worse than alcohol." And why should he? People like you will give him a pass on that. I mean, if the President really believes marijuana is no worse than alcohol, how can he live with himself seeing millions of Americans have their lives ruined without doing anything more than making some statement?


What is your analysis of why Obama is doing something that People like you would give him a free pass. You people? Didn't Ann Romney pull that last? But, Perot did it better?

Three years left in Obama's term. Let's see what happens.
 
2014-01-31 07:35:00 PM  

Ambivalence: Does the DEA have the authority to change marijuana's classification out of schedule I or does that require an act of congress. I heard, years ago, that it was the latter. Is that incorrect?


The DEA can request a change, but they never will. They're battling this tooth-n-nail because they're scared.

An act of congress can change it
 
2014-01-31 07:40:24 PM  
Federal decriminalization wouldn't matter for most. Weed is still illegal in many states. The DEA might stop investigating it, but your state's police would continue.

So, there is still a bit of a battle to go
 
2014-01-31 07:43:34 PM  
Um, it  is Congress' job, subby. Unless you're one of those dumbasses who think Obama is a dictator.
 
2014-01-31 07:48:39 PM  

Nabb1: enry: It's almost like he's recognizing there are some things he can do as president and some things he can't.

He's not going to try to change the law on marijuana because he doesn't want to. He's not going to ask the DOJ to back off medical marijuana dispensaries. He's not going to ask the DEA to look into changing anything. He'll say some pablum like marijuana is no worse than alcohol, but is he going to say to the nation "and it's time we stop sending people to prison for using a drug that I personally believe is no worse than alcohol." And why should he? People like you will give him a pass on that. I mean, if the President really believes marijuana is no worse than alcohol, how can he live with himself seeing millions of Americans have their lives ruined without doing anything more than making some statement?




I farking hate agreeing with you.
 
2014-01-31 07:50:02 PM  
Subby earned a good cockpunch with this one. Well done, douche knob.
 
2014-01-31 07:51:38 PM  

Eddie Adams from Torrance: This is one of the areas where I agree with the states' rights crowd. The feds should GTFO of the way on this.


Hell has frozen over.  I agree with Eddie.
 
2014-01-31 07:54:24 PM  

scottydoesntknow: Ambivalence: Does the DEA have the authority to change marijuana's classification out of schedule I or does that require an act of congress. I heard, years ago, that it was the latter. Is that incorrect?

The DEA can request a change, but they never will. They're battling this tooth-n-nail because they're scared.

An act of congress can change it


Considering Congress's penchant for reactively opposing anything this administration proposes, staying mum is probably the best strategy.
 
2014-01-31 07:56:53 PM  

Ambivalence: scottydoesntknow: Ambivalence: Does the DEA have the authority to change marijuana's classification out of schedule I or does that require an act of congress. I heard, years ago, that it was the latter. Is that incorrect?

The DEA can request a change, but they never will. They're battling this tooth-n-nail because they're scared.

An act of congress can change it

Considering Congress's penchant for reactively opposing anything this administration proposes, staying mum is probably the best strategy.


Sadly, this.
 
2014-01-31 08:02:39 PM  

scottydoesntknow: Ambivalence: Does the DEA have the authority to change marijuana's classification out of schedule I or does that require an act of congress. I heard, years ago, that it was the latter. Is that incorrect?

The DEA can request a change, but they never will. They're battling this tooth-n-nail because they're scared.

An act of congress can change it


According to Wikipedia, Congress can change it, but what is on Schedule 1 is usually defined by the DEA and FDA. Maybe Obama does have the power to revoke it. I think this would be a bit tougher politically for him and future Democrats if he just blanket pulled it right now. But if he lets states like WA and CO experiment and get a groundswell of support like he got for DOMA this might change. Then again, his 15 minutes are quickly coming to an end.
 
2014-01-31 08:03:57 PM  
I can't imagine how it would happen at this point in time, but if a Republican was elected President the next time around, I imagine President Obama would suddenly discover after the election that he does have the authority.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-01-31 08:04:03 PM  
cman

If pot is fully legal at the federal level, the feds can't get involved in pot-related forfeitures. In some states police make more money from federal forfeitures than state forfeitures. The feds give half the money to local police, and provide free legal assistance. Police could target hard drugs where the feds will still assist.
 
2014-01-31 08:06:23 PM  

cman: Federal decriminalization wouldn't matter for most. Weed is still illegal in many states. The DEA might stop investigating it, but your state's police would continue.

So, there is still a bit of a battle to go


I'm a liberal but opinion leans a little socially conservative in this area.  I smoke weed but I am against the legalization of pot.  I think it should be legal for medical use and possession should be decriminalized but I'm against outright legalization.

Pot is not as safe as they say it is (studies about it being a contributing factor to schizophrenia) when smoked at an early age.  Plus I think it affects peoples motivation.  A society where everyone is high is not a good thing.
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2014-01-31 08:10:26 PM  
Descartes

Ordinary executive orders can simply be overruled by the next guy.

Real regulations, made after Federal Register notice and comment, can not be simply overruled. However, they take more time than November to January to implement. Also, while the new president can't overrule them he can declare a moratorium while his team reviews them and looks for excuses to change them. Such a moratorium is standard practice when the presidency changes parties.  The regulations have to be in place by November (if I recall correctly) to be immune.
 
2014-01-31 08:20:00 PM  

fusillade762: Nabb1: He's not going to ask the DOJ to back off medical marijuana dispensaries.

Why would he ask them to do something they're already doing?


http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24570937/feds-involved-rai d- at-denver-area-marijuana

You actually think that the DOJ has backed off of raiding medical marijuana dispensaries?  Because Obama has asked?

Is Obama lying or impotent?
 
2014-01-31 08:22:13 PM  

mrshowrules: I'm a liberal but opinion leans a little socially conservative in this area. I smoke weed but I am against the legalization of pot.


You are the worst kind of person.
 
2014-01-31 08:24:49 PM  

mrshowrules: cman: Federal decriminalization wouldn't matter for most. Weed is still illegal in many states. The DEA might stop investigating it, but your state's police would continue.

So, there is still a bit of a battle to go

I'm a liberal but opinion leans a little socially conservative in this area.  I smoke weed but I am against the legalization of pot.  I think it should be legal for medical use and possession should be decriminalized but I'm against outright legalization.

Pot is not as safe as they say it is (studies about it being a contributing factor to schizophrenia) when smoked at an early age.  Plus I think it affects peoples motivation.  A society where everyone is high is not a good thing.


I'd think we would need regulations in much the same way we treat alcohol. A marijuana free-for-all probably wouldn't be good.
 
2014-01-31 08:34:18 PM  

mrshowrules: cman: Federal decriminalization wouldn't matter for most. Weed is still illegal in many states. The DEA might stop investigating it, but your state's police would continue.

So, there is still a bit of a battle to go

I'm a liberal but opinion leans a little socially conservative in this area.  I smoke weed but I am against the legalization of pot.  I think it should be legal for medical use and possession should be decriminalized but I'm against outright legalization.

Pot is not as safe as they say it is (studies about it being a contributing factor to schizophrenia) when smoked at an early age.  Plus I think it affects peoples motivation.  A society where everyone is high is not a good thing.


If marijuana were currently legal, would you be advocating for its criminalization?
 
2014-01-31 08:36:55 PM  

themindiswatching: Um, it  is Congress' job, subby. Unless you're one of those dumbasses who think Obama is a dictator.


President Obama cannot change laws. The U.S. Constitution specifies Congress has that power.
 
2014-01-31 08:38:54 PM  

mrshowrules: cman: Federal decriminalization wouldn't matter for most. Weed is still illegal in many states. The DEA might stop investigating it, but your state's police would continue.

So, there is still a bit of a battle to go

I'm a liberal but opinion leans a little socially conservative in this area.  I smoke weed but I am against the legalization of pot.  I think it should be legal for medical use and possession should be decriminalized but I'm against outright legalization.

Pot is not as safe as they say it is (studies about it being a contributing factor to schizophrenia) when smoked at an early age.  Plus I think it affects peoples motivation.  A society where everyone is high is not a good thing.


Hypocrite Meter pegged out on your post.
 
2014-01-31 08:42:05 PM  

Fark It: fusillade762: Nabb1: He's not going to ask the DOJ to back off medical marijuana dispensaries.

Why would he ask them to do something they're already doing?

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24570937/feds-involved-rai d- at-denver-area-marijuana

You actually think that the DOJ has backed off of raiding medical marijuana dispensaries?  Because Obama has asked?

Is Obama lying or impotent?


From that link:

Federal officials wouldn't give specific reasons for the raids, other than to say one of eight federal concerns around marijuana have potentially been violated. Those concerns include trafficking marijuana outside of states where it has been legalized and money laundering.

Sounds like they had evidence of more than just growing weed for glaucoma patients. Try again.
 
2014-01-31 08:42:18 PM  

AirForceVet: themindiswatching: Um, it  is Congress' job, subby. Unless you're one of those dumbasses who think Obama is a dictator.

President Obama cannot change laws. The U.S. Constitution specifies Congress has that power.


Which is what I said.
 
2014-01-31 08:44:54 PM  

fusillade762: Federal officials wouldn't give specific reasons for the raids, other than to say one of eight federal concerns around marijuana have potentially been violated. Those concerns include trafficking marijuana outside of states where it has been legalized and money laundering.

Sounds like they had evidence of more than just growing weed for glaucoma patients. Try again.


Obama is a man of his word.  The DEA is never full of shiat.
 
2014-01-31 08:46:59 PM  

QU!RK1019: mrshowrules: cman: Federal decriminalization wouldn't matter for most. Weed is still illegal in many states. The DEA might stop investigating it, but your state's police would continue.

So, there is still a bit of a battle to go

I'm a liberal but opinion leans a little socially conservative in this area.  I smoke weed but I am against the legalization of pot.  I think it should be legal for medical use and possession should be decriminalized but I'm against outright legalization.

Pot is not as safe as they say it is (studies about it being a contributing factor to schizophrenia) when smoked at an early age.  Plus I think it affects peoples motivation.  A society where everyone is high is not a good thing.

If marijuana were currently legal, would you be advocating for its criminalization?


I think your are mixing up your terms.  Legalizing and decriminalizing are two different things.  I support the former for medical use and the latter for recreational use.
 
2014-01-31 08:48:33 PM  

AirForceVet: themindiswatching: Um, it  is Congress' job, subby. Unless you're one of those dumbasses who think Obama is a dictator.

President Obama cannot change laws. The U.S. Constitution specifies Congress has that power.


Let's not act like he can do absolutely nothing to initiate reform. Or, is that your position?
 
2014-01-31 08:51:03 PM  

AirForceVet: mrshowrules: cman: Federal decriminalization wouldn't matter for most. Weed is still illegal in many states. The DEA might stop investigating it, but your state's police would continue.

So, there is still a bit of a battle to go

I'm a liberal but opinion leans a little socially conservative in this area.  I smoke weed but I am against the legalization of pot.  I think it should be legal for medical use and possession should be decriminalized but I'm against outright legalization.

Pot is not as safe as they say it is (studies about it being a contributing factor to schizophrenia) when smoked at an early age.  Plus I think it affects peoples motivation.  A society where everyone is high is not a good thing.

Hypocrite Meter pegged out on your post.


Not really.  I would be OK with being issued a fine for smoking marijuana in public, dealing or having more than 10 grams on me.   I am not ok with anyone being in prison for marijuana dealing unless to a minor.

I think legal pot shot be issued by a pharmacist.  Pot dealing/usage in public view should be considered some type of by-law infraction.
 
2014-01-31 08:51:37 PM  

ZAZ: cman

If pot is fully legal at the federal level, the feds can't get involved in pot-related forfeitures. In some states police make more money from federal forfeitures than state forfeitures. The feds give half the money to local police, and provide free legal assistance. Police could target hard drugs where the feds will still assist.


I could be mistaken, but I don't think there are any laws allowing asset forfeiture at the state level. The states always have to act in concert with the Feds.  Though the states do indeed get a big chunk of the money.

And it needs to be said: asset forfeiture is some evil, contemptible bullshiat and the SCOTUS assholes who approved it should rot in the most painful depths of hell.
 
2014-01-31 08:54:46 PM  

fusillade762: Sounds like they had evidence of more than just growing weed for glaucoma patients. Try again.


Follow-up:

www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25022675/two-months-after-colorado-raids- ma rijuana-operators-back?

"Several stores raided by armed federal agents have reopened. Some cultivation warehouses that were swept clean are again filled with marijuana plants. Nobody named in the search warrants has been arrested or even publicly accused of wrongdoing. At least three of those targets say they are baffled why the feds showed up at their doors."
 
2014-01-31 08:57:20 PM  

Lt. Cheese Weasel: Eddie Adams from Torrance: This is one of the areas where I agree with the states' rights crowd. The feds should GTFO of the way on this.

Hell has frozen over.  I agree with Eddie.


Great... now we both feel a little dirty.
 
2014-01-31 08:58:23 PM  

Fark It: fusillade762: Nabb1: He's not going to ask the DOJ to back off medical marijuana dispensaries.

Why would he ask them to do something they're already doing?

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_24570937/feds-involved-rai d- at-denver-area-marijuana

You actually think that the DOJ has backed off of raiding medical marijuana dispensaries?  Because Obama has asked?

Is Obama lying or impotent?


Here in California actual walk-in dispensaries have largely been put out of business, or else they are operating underground or as delivery only services.  This was done by threatening the landlords that if they continued to rent to a dispensary, the feds would seize the entire property under drug forfeiture laws.  No messy trials, no drawn out court cases, but still had the effect of closing them down.  I used to pass several on my drive to work, now I pass none.

Now maybe something has changed in the last month or two, as a few have opened up in the next town, so I'm not sure if a court case has just been won, or if a couple guys just managed to find a friendly landlord that is willing to fight the feds.
 
2014-01-31 08:59:06 PM  

Nabb1: mrshowrules: cman: Federal decriminalization wouldn't matter for most. Weed is still illegal in many states. The DEA might stop investigating it, but your state's police would continue.

So, there is still a bit of a battle to go

I'm a liberal but opinion leans a little socially conservative in this area.  I smoke weed but I am against the legalization of pot.  I think it should be legal for medical use and possession should be decriminalized but I'm against outright legalization.

Pot is not as safe as they say it is (studies about it being a contributing factor to schizophrenia) when smoked at an early age.  Plus I think it affects peoples motivation.  A society where everyone is high is not a good thing.

I'd think we would need regulations in much the same way we treat alcohol. A marijuana free-for-all probably wouldn't be good.


Look at Amsterdam.  I've ordered a joint from a menu in Amsterdam and holy shiat was it strong.  Also, more recently in Rotterdam just before they started tightening the rules.  Legalization sounds great in concept but in practice it creates a whole bunch of problems.  Heck, I've even smoked pot in cafe in Vancouver.

The biggest problem with pot is that people who need it for legitimate reasons or even just for responsible recreational use can't get it sometimes and other people end up in jail over it.  Fix that.  Stop that immediately.  Treat it like valium not beer.

You better be very careful as having this as new society-wide socially acceptable thing like alcohol.  Look at the Netherlands.  They have learned some important lessons.  There is a happy middle ground here.
 
2014-01-31 09:00:58 PM  

fusillade762: I could be mistaken, but I don't think there are any laws allowing asset forfeiture at the state level.


You are mistaken.

https://www.aclu.org/criminal-law-reform/civil-asset-forfeiture

https://www.ij.org/part-ii-grading-the-states-2
 
2014-01-31 09:05:54 PM  
My outrage:   :\
 
2014-01-31 09:05:56 PM  

Fark It: fusillade762: I could be mistaken, but I don't think there are any laws allowing asset forfeiture at the state level.

You are mistaken.

https://www.aclu.org/criminal-law-reform/civil-asset-forfeiture

https://www.ij.org/part-ii-grading-the-states-2


Huh. Good to know. Infuriating, but good to know.


Fark It: fusillade762: Sounds like they had evidence of more than just growing weed for glaucoma patients. Try again.

Follow-up:

www.denverpost.com/news/ci_25022675/two-months-after-colorado-raids- ma rijuana-operators-back?

"Several stores raided by armed federal agents have reopened. Some cultivation warehouses that were swept clean are again filled with marijuana plants. Nobody named in the search warrants has been arrested or even publicly accused of wrongdoing. At least three of those targets say they are baffled why the feds showed up at their doors."


OK, I agree that's pretty absurd.
 
2014-01-31 09:06:56 PM  
Derp.
 
2014-01-31 09:08:21 PM  

mrshowrules: Legalization sounds great in concept but in practice it creates a whole bunch of problems.


Such as?
 
2014-01-31 09:12:34 PM  
Ah, this must be the Empty Suit day. Tuesday was Evil Tyrant day.
 
2014-01-31 09:14:22 PM  

violentsalvation: mrshowrules: Legalization sounds great in concept but in practice it creates a whole bunch of problems.

Such as?


Increase development of schizophrenia in youth.  Public safety issues.  Work place accidents.  Lazy unmotivated youth.  Loss of productivity.
 
2014-01-31 09:17:33 PM  
As much as Obama threatens, I doubt he'll do all that much acting around Congress. He's certainly not going to spend what little political capital he has left on an errand he doesn't care particularly about.

Yeah, it sucks, but very few politicians care about legalizing it.
 
2014-01-31 09:17:51 PM  
Executive branch: enforces laws

Legislative branch: makes laws

Thanks Obama
 
2014-01-31 09:20:10 PM  

Nabb1: Penn Jillette's thoughts. Link (NSFW language)


you couldn't pay me to care about that ponce's thoughts.
 
2014-01-31 09:21:31 PM  

Scorpitron is reduced to a thin red paste: Nabb1: Penn Jillette's thoughts. Link (NSFW language)

you couldn't pay me to care about that ponce's thoughts.


This.  He's a real asshole.
 
2014-01-31 09:21:32 PM  

mrshowrules: Increase development of schizophrenia in youth


Citation, and please tell how legalization means you support allowing under-18s to use marijuana.
 
Displayed 50 of 285 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report