By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Obama was LYING all along about prosecuting MEDICAL MARIJUANA.

HappySqurriel said:
Soleron said:
mrstickball said:
...
...


From my (Canadian) perspective ...

Neither Obama nor Bush (and most western leaders) could adequately be called a progressive or a conservative. Bush and Obama are corporatist/unionist-statist leaders with arbitrary stances on social issues. Regardless of the political party they belong to, these leaders expand the size and power of the government to benefit large corporations and/or unions at the expense of small companies and individuals.

Yes, that's pretty much what I see as 'right' these days.

Sad thing is that there is no alternative choice.Even third parties don't help - in the UK we got a coalition with the third party Lib Dems as a junior partner, and as soon as they got power they reversed their stances on all of their key issues wholesale to align to the Conservatives - from signing a pledge opposing tuition fees to arguing they were necessary, from being anti-nuclear to pro, and opposing wars like Iraq to supporting ongoing deployment in Afghanistan and Libya.

Our opposition, Labour, agree with the vast majority of current government policies too.

There is no party with alternative views that has a hope of winning a seat, same in the US, and same in Canada as far as I can tell.



Around the Network

That has always been the odd contradiction on medicinal marijuana, that states can do whatever they please but it won't stop the FBI from picking up anyone with pot, authorized on the state level or not

Disappointing on Obama's part, though, since the political will is actually more towards legalized marijuana now than when he made that campaign promise, which also makes it a vexing decision.

Re: Obama. Much of what he's backpedaled on does bother me as a proper leftist, though some of it I understand (namely Libya. He didn't "start" that war, Kasz, that war was ongoing, and it was a ideological bind for the west to sit back and let these people who professed a wish for democracy be slaughtered by an old foe of the West, and is a necessary commitment), but like hell i'm going to vote for a Republican, or a tone-neutral libertarian, since i'm an old school statist socialist with leanings of third-way fascism, and i find libertarianism to be just as poor a choice as a more state-oriented conservatism



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

and i should care why?



MARCUSDJACKSON said:
and i should care why?

Nobody asked you to care.

I happen to know a lot of people with cancer and other illnesses that leave them not wanting to eat and MJ is the only thing that can get their appetite back. This is a drug that helps sick people.



chocoloco said:
MARCUSDJACKSON said:
and i should care why?

Nobody asked you to care.

I happen to know a lot of people with cancer and other illnesses that leave them not wanting to eat and MJ is the only thing that can get their appetite back. This is a drug that helps sick people.

opps wrong thread.

im getting these things wixed up. i support the legallization of MJ



Around the Network
spurgeonryan said:
Other than the horrible problems in Mexico which is worse than the Iraq war, I could care less about the marijuana thing, and want the lawmakers to worry more about the country being a country thing.

Number one advantage to medical mj. Lots of tax money to stimulate local econimies that will put the country back together. It takes small things my man to help for the greater good.



Mr Khan said:
That has always been the odd contradiction on medicinal marijuana, that states can do whatever they please but it won't stop the FBI from picking up anyone with pot, authorized on the state level or not

Disappointing on Obama's part, though, since the political will is actually more towards legalized marijuana now than when he made that campaign promise, which also makes it a vexing decision.

Re: Obama. Much of what he's backpedaled on does bother me as a proper leftist, though some of it I understand (namely Libya. He didn't "start" that war, Kasz, that war was ongoing, and it was a ideological bind for the west to sit back and let these people who professed a wish for democracy be slaughtered by an old foe of the West, and is a necessary commitment), but like hell i'm going to vote for a Republican, or a tone-neutral libertarian, since i'm an old school statist socialist with leanings of third-way fascism, and i find libertarianism to be just as poor a choice as a more state-oriented conservatism

No he entered the US in it.  Which was even more pointless.  At least Iraq and Afghanistan had douches in power that nobody was trying to get rid of.

Libya... we could of did NOTHING and just let europe take care of it for once. 

Besides, It's not like there aren't other people getting slaughtered by enemies of the west while we do nothing.



Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
That has always been the odd contradiction on medicinal marijuana, that states can do whatever they please but it won't stop the FBI from picking up anyone with pot, authorized on the state level or not

Disappointing on Obama's part, though, since the political will is actually more towards legalized marijuana now than when he made that campaign promise, which also makes it a vexing decision.

Re: Obama. Much of what he's backpedaled on does bother me as a proper leftist, though some of it I understand (namely Libya. He didn't "start" that war, Kasz, that war was ongoing, and it was a ideological bind for the west to sit back and let these people who professed a wish for democracy be slaughtered by an old foe of the West, and is a necessary commitment), but like hell i'm going to vote for a Republican, or a tone-neutral libertarian, since i'm an old school statist socialist with leanings of third-way fascism, and i find libertarianism to be just as poor a choice as a more state-oriented conservatism

No he entered the US in it.  Which was even more pointless.  At least Iraq and Afghanistan had douches in power that nobody was trying to get rid of.

Libya... we could of did NOTHING and just let europe take care of it for once. 

Besides, It's not like there aren't other people getting slaughtered by enemies of the west while we do nothing.

Not really. At least not in the context of an active civil war that is something that could be intervened in readily. I mean the Burmese have been playing cat-and-mouse with the Karin and the Kachin for decades, and the Laotians have an on-again-off-again thing against the Hmong, though neither of them are really our enemies (for balance of power purposes against the Vietnamese, we're even slightly friendly with Laos), but nobody else out there is just out-and-out waging full on war against a group of their people that is professing a desire for democracy (though i'm fully aware that the Libyan Rebels in this case probably don't want democracy, or at least don't want the kind of democracy we want)

I also agree that Europe should be pulling more of the weight in there, but i disagree in that the US should have a role either way



Monster Hunter: pissing me off since 2010.

Mr Khan said:
Kasz216 said:
Mr Khan said:
That has always been the odd contradiction on medicinal marijuana, that states can do whatever they please but it won't stop the FBI from picking up anyone with pot, authorized on the state level or not

Disappointing on Obama's part, though, since the political will is actually more towards legalized marijuana now than when he made that campaign promise, which also makes it a vexing decision.

Re: Obama. Much of what he's backpedaled on does bother me as a proper leftist, though some of it I understand (namely Libya. He didn't "start" that war, Kasz, that war was ongoing, and it was a ideological bind for the west to sit back and let these people who professed a wish for democracy be slaughtered by an old foe of the West, and is a necessary commitment), but like hell i'm going to vote for a Republican, or a tone-neutral libertarian, since i'm an old school statist socialist with leanings of third-way fascism, and i find libertarianism to be just as poor a choice as a more state-oriented conservatism

No he entered the US in it.  Which was even more pointless.  At least Iraq and Afghanistan had douches in power that nobody was trying to get rid of.

Libya... we could of did NOTHING and just let europe take care of it for once. 

Besides, It's not like there aren't other people getting slaughtered by enemies of the west while we do nothing.

Not really. At least not in the context of an active civil war that is something that could be intervened in readily. I mean the Burmese have been playing cat-and-mouse with the Karin and the Kachin for decades, and the Laotians have an on-again-off-again thing against the Hmong, though neither of them are really our enemies (for balance of power purposes against the Vietnamese, we're even slightly friendly with Laos), but nobody else out there is just out-and-out waging full on war against a group of their people that is professing a desire for democracy (though i'm fully aware that the Libyan Rebels in this case probably don't want democracy, or at least don't want the kind of democracy we want)

I also agree that Europe should be pulling more of the weight in there, but i disagree in that the US should have a role either way

Sudan?  Ethnic cleansing has been going on there for a couple months at least.  (Again!)

Real actual ethnic cleansing and not.... possible expected ethnic cleansing.

I mean, don't forget the rebels on the day it's being recognized as getting their own country.



All political leaders lie in order to get into power.