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.

(LA Weekly)   Obama administration seeks to move Marijuana from Schedule 1 classification. Fark: It will require Congressional cooperation   (laweekly.com) divider line 42
    More: Unlikely, Obama, Obama administration, Dana Rohrabacher, decriminalization, Drug Policy Alliance, Michele Leonhart, United States House Committee on Appropriations, U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder  
•       •       •

5289 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Apr 2014 at 2:04 PM (24 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

2014-04-05 11:06:33 AM
6 votes:

eurotrader: Why the AG needs anything from congress to reschedule marijuana other than an excuse to continue doing nothing is unclear. Treaties just require it remains a controlled substance. Holder could be going with the standard approach of appearing to want to do something or wanting to blame the house republicans for blocking him but the law does not seem to require it. A mid-terms run up stunt is the most likely answer. The link goes to the law on what only AG Holder has to do. A report and request to lower the schedule have been already submitted with accompanying report supporting the lowering and all they require is a signature from Holder.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/811


Having congress come out against rescheduling it would be great for driving the youth vote to the polls in 2014.  frkkit- the GOP pioneered using the wedge issue to drive turnout.  This looks to be one of those goose/gander situations.
2014-04-05 10:27:17 AM
6 votes:
Why the AG needs anything from congress to reschedule marijuana other than an excuse to continue doing nothing is unclear. Treaties just require it remains a controlled substance. Holder could be going with the standard approach of appearing to want to do something or wanting to blame the house republicans for blocking him but the law does not seem to require it. A mid-terms run up stunt is the most likely answer. The link goes to the law on what only AG Holder has to do. A report and request to lower the schedule have been already submitted with accompanying report supporting the lowering and all they require is a signature from Holder.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/811
2014-04-05 02:47:39 PM
4 votes:

Boojum2k: neongoats: sports cars painted as police cars to cruise in

Heh. Years back, I had a state Trooper in a 5.0 Mustang challenge me and my Grand National to a race. He decided they needed faster pursuit cars.

/Friend of the family, so no he didn't jack me up afterwards, he was a graceful loser


I think they should be stuck in smart cars, frankly. Pursuit is dangerous and unnecessary in 98% of situations. Stick em in those little things you see eastern European bobbys in.
2014-04-05 02:15:13 PM
4 votes:
This is little more than a trolling attempt to try and get the GOP to try and oppose it because fark it Obummer is for it.

The FDA does NOT need congressional approval to change a drug.

Anyone wanna shop trollface on the POTUS or AG?
2014-04-05 01:47:46 PM
4 votes:
Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.
2014-04-05 04:32:38 PM
3 votes:
Funny, it didn't require Congressional approval to reschedule Hydrocodone from Schedule III to Schedule II. Certain groups will call it a refreshing Spring shower when Obama micturates on their dorsal side and informs them it is precipitation. Never mind that Number two is a Drug Warrior since 1972 and responsible for an entire generation of black men being imprisoned for a ridiculous "difference" between crack and cocaine sentencing. Thanks partisan myrmidons and lickspittles. You're the problem.
GBB
2014-04-05 02:57:35 PM
3 votes:
It all comes down to marketing and presentation.

The reason why legalizing marijuana is so difficult is because of public perception.  It was never made illegal because it was harmful.  It was made illegal the same way alcohol was made illegal: because of the way people behaved while using it.  In the 20's, boozehounds were annoying as fark and the straights couldn't stand it.  Sure, you'll blame taxes as a financial motivation, and moonshine as a health concern.  But, it really comes down to flappers and drunks.  The only reason prohibition was repealed was because the behavior caused by prohibition was worse that before prohibition.  Look at how they regulated the shait out of it after repeal.

The stoners are basically causing the straights to freak out and the way they act override any health benefits that it actually provides.  Same with oxycontin.  It has legitimate uses, but once people start abusing it, selling it, and create a counter-culture around it, it gets shut down.

So, if anyone ever wants this "movement" to move along any faster, I would suggest finding a way to tone down the stoner attitude surrounding the issue.  Cheech & Chong, Harold & Kumar, and Jay & Silent Bob are not going to help anyone understand that marijuana helps chemo patients with their appetites.  And, no one is going to believe a legitimate drug comes in "flavors" like "Super Cush" and "Raspberry Delight" or requires a glass device in the shape of a naked dragon-woman hybrid to administer.

Sure, these things shouldn't matter, but they do.  You have the unfortunate task of convincing the squares that this stuff they hate and don't understand is harmless and has actual benefits.  Don't make your job harder.  Wise up a little.  Clean up the image, and I'll bet this would go a lot smoother and faster.
2014-04-05 02:46:28 PM
3 votes:
Most of the Tea Party is in favor of legal pot.  It's the old-line conservatives led by Boner that are funded by the big drug companies and the prison industry that violently oppose legalization.
2014-04-05 02:39:47 PM
3 votes:

LeroyBourne: Wait til it's legal all across the country, and we can see what good things drug money can buy.


The cops already know what drug money can buy. Big police stations, helicopters, UAVs, machine guns, all kinds of military toys, sports cars painted as police cars to cruise in, etc.

So, anything that punches them in the dick, repeatedly, until they pass out from the pain and die is a good thing.
2014-04-05 12:21:43 PM
3 votes:
Good. Should have been done a long while ago.

If it becomes a wedge issue, all the better to drive the Idiot Brigade out of the process.
2014-04-05 03:08:13 PM
2 votes:
Anybody that reads or watches a story about "Charlotte's Web" and doesn't support this is 100% an asshole.
2014-04-05 02:50:26 PM
2 votes:

StrikitRich: Getting marijuana on the ballot is the Democrats plan to get young voters to turn out in the mid-term elections, which is why George Soros has dropped $80 million in support and John Morgan is pushing it in Florida to get his boy Charlie Crist re-elected.


Considering the youth vote is usually 20% of the eligible young voters, and hasn't really trended above 30%, pinning a cause to the youth vote is usually the casual way to make it sound important while focusing few resources on it, and having an easy blame when it fails.
There's more than a few middle aged liberal Democrats, libertarians, and even moderate Repubs who support it, a better strategy would be pushing the issue with these larger voting blocks.

Or, you know, telling the FDA to change the classification.
2014-04-05 02:14:25 PM
2 votes:

rev. dave: FTFA: "...it would be hard for us to believe Republicans would support some medical legitimacy for pot in a Tea Party world. "
Hold on now, I thought the Tea Party were libertarian.  If they resist this, they are just like those guys who think the bible is against homosexuality, but eat pork, get divorced, touch women during that time of month...etc.  IF so, then hypocrites.


Right, but a higher priority than personal freedom is never, ever, ever, admitting that a Democrat is doing the right thing.
2014-04-05 02:13:28 PM
2 votes:

BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.


Politics. If they reclassify then Republicans have to oppose it.  They can't let Obama do anything useful without opposing it on racist grounds.
2014-04-05 02:12:19 PM
2 votes:
If obama wanted to he could just issue a executive order to the fda since it falls under the executive branch.
2014-04-05 08:12:07 PM
1 votes:

geek_mars: zepher: hubiestubert: BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.

To nail down specific Congresscritters on their vote. It's called strategy. You get a vote that will cast these strong, freedom loving, Libertarian loving souls voting against something that they claim to support. I will not be surprised if the House tries to bury their turn on this.

In other words, Obama doesn't give two shiats about actually moving MJ out of schedule 1 he just wants to use it as a political weapon.
He's hoping that he can gain a few libertarian and hippie votes by lying about what it would take to move MJ off schedule 1 and try and catch a few Republicans voting against it so the DNC and can run endless ads and the MSM can crow about the GOP relentlessly this fall.
Even though I am totally against the criminalization of MJ if I was a GOP Congressman I would refuse to vote on it based on the fact that Obama doesn't need a single Congressional vote to move MJ off schedule 1.

I guess you're perfectly fine with the political posturing instead of any real action.

I think you raise some interesting points, but let me play devil's advocate...

Assume for a moment that Obama does want to get MJ off of schedule 1, maybe just so medical research can start happening.

If he just moves it using his executive powers, the right will, once again, start screaming about abuse of powers and bullying his agenda onto the American people etc., etc., etc. They'll be able to frame the criticisms the way they want by pointing out that Obama didn't attempt to work with Congress, which represents the people. They'll be able to say that no framework for this specific drug (in terms of research, etc.) was established by Congress.

Rather than maki ...


With the over 32 times Obama has unilaterally changed Obamacare and after his 'I got a pen and a phone' comment I seriously doubt he's worried about being seen as abusing his power.
Never forget that every last move Obama makes is based on political motive.
He makes the most of the Chicago style political machine.
2014-04-05 08:05:38 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: zepher: He's hoping that he can gain a few libertarian and hippie votes

Yeah, have to score that enormous voting block.


The Democrats are so desperate to not lose the majority they're going after every last vote they can.
They're willing to lie and cheat to keep their power, like every other politician.
2014-04-05 08:02:48 PM
1 votes:
I think it was around 1970 that marijuana was classified with the hard drugs.  The guy who did it said that they didn't know much about it, so they needed to classify it with the bad stuff until they could do some research.  Then of course the classification prevented any research from being done.
2014-04-05 06:56:59 PM
1 votes:

zepher: hubiestubert: BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.

To nail down specific Congresscritters on their vote. It's called strategy. You get a vote that will cast these strong, freedom loving, Libertarian loving souls voting against something that they claim to support. I will not be surprised if the House tries to bury their turn on this.

In other words, Obama doesn't give two shiats about actually moving MJ out of schedule 1 he just wants to use it as a political weapon.
He's hoping that he can gain a few libertarian and hippie votes by lying about what it would take to move MJ off schedule 1 and try and catch a few Republicans voting against it so the DNC and can run endless ads and the MSM can crow about the GOP relentlessly this fall.
Even though I am totally against the criminalization of MJ if I was a GOP Congressman I would refuse to vote on it based on the fact that Obama doesn't need a single Congressional vote to move MJ off schedule 1.

I guess you're perfectly fine with the political posturing instead of any real action.


I think you raise some interesting points, but let me play devil's advocate...

Assume for a moment that Obama does want to get MJ off of schedule 1, maybe just so medical research can start happening.

If he just moves it using his executive powers, the right will, once again, start screaming about abuse of powers and bullying his agenda onto the American people etc., etc., etc. They'll be able to frame the criticisms the way they want by pointing out that Obama didn't attempt to work with Congress, which represents the people. They'll be able to say that no framework for this specific drug (in terms of research, etc.) was established by Congress.

Rather than making a grab for a few libertarian votes, he might be trying to shield his fellow Democrats from the shiat-storm that would follow them into the mid-terms if he were to act unilaterally. He'd have nothing to lose since he can't run again, but his fellow Democrats would suffer any backlash.

Go one step further and assume that Obama does want to move MJ towards legalization. What he's doing can allow for a government discussion on the merits of the idea rather and one that can't be shouted down based on him rescheduling it without engaging Congress.

So, it may be that rather than typical political posturing, Obama is trying to raise the issue in a way that doesn't enrage conservatives or galvanize opposition to his fellow Democrats. Watching Republicans squirm as they try to juggle personal liberty vs. restriction while balancing on lobbyists vs. tax revenues would just be a bonus, I suppose.

/not trying to white-knight for Obama, just offering an alternative idea
2014-04-05 06:44:08 PM
1 votes:

Lokasenna:

Alcohol was made illegal because of the religious right



rro



Sorry, princess. Prohibition was passed by Progressive busybodies from the Left and the Right. What is charmingly referred to as the Congo church (Congregationalists) could never be referred to as the "Religious Right" even in the worst viper's fevered dope dream. Busybodyism doesn't know a left/right axis.
2014-04-05 05:31:00 PM
1 votes:
As much as this is NOT likely to happen, I think the vast majority of Farkers are in agreement: Legalize it and tax it = revenue stream from sin tax. Take away some money from the DEA and local cops from enforcement (federal matching funds for drug enforcement proportional to marijuana arrests) = tax money saved. Get the non-violent petty possession folks out of jail = massive savings.

It makes TOO much sense = it will never happen. Sad.

Regan's war on Drugs failed. Get over it.
2014-04-05 05:10:56 PM
1 votes:

hubiestubert: BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.

To nail down specific Congresscritters on their vote. It's called strategy. You get a vote that will cast these strong, freedom loving, Libertarian loving souls voting against something that they claim to support. I will not be surprised if the House tries to bury their turn on this.


In other words, Obama doesn't give two shiats about actually moving MJ out of schedule 1 he just wants to use it as a political weapon.
He's hoping that he can gain a few libertarian and hippie votes by lying about what it would take to move MJ off schedule 1 and try and catch a few Republicans voting against it so the DNC and can run endless ads and the MSM can crow about the GOP relentlessly this fall.
Even though I am totally against the criminalization of MJ if I was a GOP Congressman I would refuse to vote on it based on the fact that Obama doesn't need a single Congressional vote to move MJ off schedule 1.

I guess you're perfectly fine with the political posturing instead of any real action.
2014-04-05 05:08:11 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: Destructor: I think they're worried that once the gate is opened, other drugs will follow suit. Do they have a right to be worried? I suppose.

Well has that happened in places in Europe where it has been somewhat legal for some time now? I don't think there are legal crack bars in Amsterdam yet.



Portugal is a better example, going on now for over 13 year with a change in laws that views all drug possession for personal use as a civil matter with no criminal charges. The result has been a reduction in use and reduction in additional problems with heroin and cocaine related diseases and crime.
2014-04-05 04:44:12 PM
1 votes:

Mugato: There are still plenty of drugs to fight, still plenty of money to be made in the drug war. They just have to get off the silly slippery slope notion that legalizing weed will somehow lead to meth being sold next to the Tylenol at the Circle K.


I think they're worried that once the gate is opened, other drugs will follow suit. Do they have a right to be worried? I suppose.

The problem is, they have absolutely no credibility. For the last 80 years, they've been telling the public that pot is as bad as heroin. And now? Oops, I guess not. Their lie is now fully exposed. Basically, if the gateways to other drugs do open, it's in part their own damned fault.

Now, personally, and in the interest of full disclosure, I am for legalizing pretty much all drugs (a few exceptions, like, the ones that actually do permanently lobotomize you or cause you to be a genuine menace to society). Oh, it'll be horrible--at first--I'm sure. But it beats what we have going on now. And in the end, I think we'll be better off for it.
2014-04-05 03:42:14 PM
1 votes:

JSTACAT: Strangely, DEA chief Michele Leonhart has been making bizarre statements about weed this week.
First she said that voters in Colorado and Washington were essentially coerced into voting to legalize recreational pot. She also said that Mexican drug cartels were infiltrating those states to prepare to sell marijuana at prices cheaper than one could find at a legal retailer.


It's not that hard to understand. Put yourself in her shoes. Here you are, doing your job. It's a hard and thankless job... And then, without warning, CO and WA literally flip you the bird... And now there's talk that all the "good" you've done is actually "evil". How could that possibly be?

The loss of public support against marijuana has got to be driving the anti-drug people insane. If only there was some way they could take the edge off...
2014-04-05 03:22:51 PM
1 votes:

efgeise: BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.

He is probably hoping to use House GOP obstructionist objectives to swing the Libertarian vote towards Dems in the midterms. It's a smart move, from a political strategy standpoint.


ahh...the "politics of old" he was going to lead us away from.....
2014-04-05 03:10:48 PM
1 votes:

BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.



The "won't you think of the children, puppies, prison industry" lobby would impeach him over it.

Not that they have anything to impeach him with, but they'd go through the motions anyhow, just to waste time and money.
2014-04-05 03:09:17 PM
1 votes:

GBB: The reason why legalizing marijuana is so difficult is because of public perception.  It was never made illegal because it was harmful.  It was made illegal the same way alcohol was made illegal: because of the way people behaved while using it


Except you only hear about the assholes. No one ever hears about the stoners who smoke after work but you would never know they were stoners, of which I know a few myself.
2014-04-05 03:02:12 PM
1 votes:

Boojum2k: We've had three Presidents in a row who admitted to using drugs, and it didn't ruin their lives. Maybe the same consideration can be shown to the rest of us, right?


Don't you get it? They're rich. That makes them better than the rest of us. Laws are for poor people.
2014-04-05 02:57:06 PM
1 votes:

tjsands1118: Incontinent_dog_and_monkey_rodeo: Most of the Tea Party is in favor of legal pot.  It's the old-line conservatives led by Boner that are funded by the big drug companies and the prison industry that violently oppose legalization.

Not to mention the last Libertarian Presidential nominee was Gary Johnson, the former governor of New Mexico, who admitted to using marijuana illegally for medical propose. He also help spearhead the NM medical marijuana program.


We've had three Presidents in a row who admitted to using drugs, and it didn't ruin their lives. Maybe the same consideration can be shown to the rest of us, right?
2014-04-05 02:41:00 PM
1 votes:
images.wikia.com
2014-04-05 02:36:51 PM
1 votes:

JSTACAT: Forked Tongues:

The Yakima tribe decided to ban pot on their lands including adjacent hunting areas recently.
Here's an insight as to why:
The issue is all Forked up.

Issue no 1 is the Forked communication and Legal policy;

Wa state says is ok, lets make money,

Wa DC says it aint ok, its a sch. 1 narcotic; and they wont let pot into the banking sys, it is still a class 1 drug felony by the books;

Listen Up!
use & possession bars a person from owning or carrying guns and ammo, possibly other weapons; & etc. This is Federal Law!

If anyone knows the dangers of Fork Tongue syndrome it would be The Tribal Elders, amirite?

Issue #2 is that if it is only a medicine [classification], then constant casual use degenerates it as a medicine. That is another Fork.

It is also a trap. by allowing pot in Wa & Col. & other with states medical pot, a list is being added to by the hour... all the invisible users are now [or will be soon] in the database. wink-wink

Legal means that it has the same status as a vegetable that you can pick roadside, grow in your garden or casually buy in the grocery store, like lettuce or cigarettes..

Another issue is that people aren't satisfied with legal pot, but now they want to concentrate it into a powerful narcotic, using poisons & dangerous chemicals. Yet another Fork

This is why we can't have nice things!

Folks, listen to your Elders! Their wisdom can save you a lot of money and grief!

The additional lands [where they want to enforce the ban] are to be used by the Tribe by treaty, therefore they have a right to govern any activity which would interfere with that useage right.

A young hothead or old sleeper wielding a gun, bow, vehicle while under the influence of pot or some powerful pot based concoction is extremely hazardous to wildlife and humans, and vastly increases fire danger.

Such as; halfway back on the 15 mile hike down the mountainside, just before sundown.., dude! did we put out the fire completely? i smell smoke!

...


You're high right now, aren't you?
2014-04-05 02:23:07 PM
1 votes:

hubiestubert: BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.

To nail down specific Congresscritters on their vote. It's called strategy. You get a vote that will cast these strong, freedom loving, Libertarian loving souls voting against something that they claim to support. I will not be surprised if the House tries to bury their turn on this.


Yes, petty politics, awesome.

Requiring Congressional approval is the surest way to get nothing to happen.
2014-04-05 02:20:52 PM
1 votes:

Isitoveryet: If this happens, all those marijuana heads will start snorting heroin. Gateway drug & all that.


Exactly!
2014-04-05 02:17:58 PM
1 votes:

The Book Was Better: rev. dave: FTFA: "...it would be hard for us to believe Republicans would support some medical legitimacy for pot in a Tea Party world. "
Hold on now, I thought the Tea Party were libertarian.  If they resist this, they are just like those guys who think the bible is against homosexuality, but eat pork, get divorced, touch women during that time of month...etc.  IF so, then hypocrites.

I thought that was an unnecessarily snarky comment in what at first seemed like a news article. I was also under the impression that tea parties were more libertarian than Puritan


The tea party is about using religion to justify their control.  True libertarians don't want to control anything.  We're about leaving you the fark alone as long as you cause no harm to the life, liberty or property of others through fraud or force.
2014-04-05 02:17:28 PM
1 votes:

BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.


To nail down specific Congresscritters on their vote. It's called strategy. You get a vote that will cast these strong, freedom loving, Libertarian loving souls voting against something that they claim to support. I will not be surprised if the House tries to bury their turn on this.
2014-04-05 02:15:30 PM
1 votes:

BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.


He is probably hoping to use House GOP obstructionist objectives to swing the Libertarian vote towards Dems in the midterms. It's a smart move, from a political strategy standpoint.
2014-04-05 02:14:29 PM
1 votes:

meow said the dog: Oh yes the Attorney General providing promotion of the drug addiction and overdosing is always the greatest of the ideas.


Wut?  Overdosing of what?  Hubris?
2014-04-05 02:10:25 PM
1 votes:

BravadoGT: Obama's wrong about this.  The law allows the AG to reclassify it to another category without Congressional approval.

So why is he dragging Congress into it?  He has more legal authority to re-schedule pot than, say, extending the deadline for Obamacare or arbitrarily granting exemptions to it.


An excuse to use if something goes wrong after rescheduling?
2014-04-05 02:10:00 PM
1 votes:

Nabb1: This. They don't care about substantive reform.


Nobody in congress cares about that. Every move every politician makes, democrat or republican, is all about reelection and pandering to donors.
2014-04-05 02:08:54 PM
1 votes:
FTFA: "...it would be hard for us to believe Republicans would support some medical legitimacy for pot in a Tea Party world. "
Hold on now, I thought the Tea Party were libertarian.  If they resist this, they are just like those guys who think the bible is against homosexuality, but eat pork, get divorced, touch women during that time of month...etc.  IF so, then hypocrites.
2014-04-05 11:19:34 AM
1 votes:
The real fun from rescheduling would be the full faith and credit part. If rescheduled then medical marijuana patients could receive a prescription instead of a recommendation from a Doctor and states are supposed to recognize prescription from licensed providers from other states so having a red card would mean being able to travel anywhere in the US and  carry meds.
 
Displayed 42 of 42 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report