Federal agents raid marijuana dispensaries in Washington

[Jesus Malverde]

Source: Associated Press

Federal agents have raided a number of medical marijuana dispensaries in the Puget Sound region.

Drug Enforcement Administration spokeswoman Jodie Underwood said Wednesday afternoon the operation ended Wednesday evening, but she declined to provide any specifics of the operation.

Washington state legalized adult possession of up to an ounce of marijuana last fall, but marijuana remains illegal under federal law.

Seattle medical marijuana attorney Douglas Hiatt said the targeted dispensaries include Seattle Cross, Tacoma Cross and Bayside Collective in Olympia.


Read more: http://www.katu.com/news/local/DEA-raiding-marijuana-dispensaries-in-Washington-216826061.html

[drynberg]

1. OBAMA HAS LIED TOTALLY ABOUT BUSTING MEDICAL MARIJUANA

Looks to me like a good time to sing the States Rights Song in the halls of the USA Congress.

[Billy Pilgrim]

31. In this Rolling Stone interview he explains the crackdown on medical marijuana dispensaries.

Interviewer:
"Let me ask you about the War on Drugs. You vowed in 2008, when you were running for election, that you would not "use Justice Department resources to try and circumvent state laws about medical marijuana." Yet we just ran a story that shows your administration is launching more raids on medical pot than the Bush administration did. What's up with that?"


Obama:
"Here's what's up: What I specifically said was that we were not going to prioritize prosecutions of persons who are using medical marijuana. I never made a commitment that somehow we were going to give carte blanche to large-scale producers and operators of marijuana – and the reason is, because it's against federal law. I can't nullify congressional law. I can't ask the Justice Department to say, "Ignore completely a federal law that's on the books." What I can say is, "Use your prosecutorial discretion and properly prioritize your resources to go after things that are really doing folks damage." As a consequence, there haven't been prosecutions of users of marijuana for medical purposes.

The only tension that's come up – and this gets hyped up a lot – is a murky area where you have large-scale, commercial operations that may supply medical marijuana users, but in some cases may also be supplying recreational users. In that situation, we put the Justice Department in a very difficult place if we're telling them, "This is supposed to be against the law, but we want you to turn the other way." That's not something we're going to do. I do think it's important and useful to have a broader debate about our drug laws. One of the things we've done over the past three years was to make a sensible change when it came to the disparity in sentencing between crack cocaine and powder cocaine. We've had a discussion about how to focus on treatment, taking a public-health approach to drugs and lessening the overwhelming emphasis on criminal laws as a tool to deal with this issue. I think that's an appropriate debate that we should have."

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/ready-for-the-fight-rolling-stone-interview-with-barack-obama-20120425

[DeSwiss]

36. That is fucking BULLSHIT!!! n/t

[Billy Pilgrim]

39. The bullshit is the law itself.

It's clear the DEA is intent on enforcing the law. Obama has no legal justification for telling them not to.

[DeSwiss]

43. Well then I suppose it's horseshit.....

...when you unilaterally decided to only ''partially enforce'' a law.

''I'm not going to hurt the little guys directly, I'll just shut off his/her suppliers and then when they die horribly I can claim my hands are as clean as the fucking driven snow.''

- Yeah, I'd say that is horseshit.

[Billy Pilgrim]

46. It's a large variety of different types of shit. Agreed.

[Nevernose]

62. Yes, he does

"Focus our efforts on cocaine dealers and people smuggling Mexican meth" is a perfectly legal justification. It's also consistent with what he said in the interview about "focusing priorities towards preventing harm."

He's the head of the executive branch, and ultimately it's his authority as to what the DEA does with the resources that Congress gives them.

[Niceguy1]

85. in my area

The dispensaries were flagrantly violating the medical mj law that was written by the med mj community.
The people pretending to have an illness are ruining it for everyone.

[FiveGoodMen]

117. The people who think you have to be sick to smoke pot are ruining it for everyone.

[Niceguy1]

120. California law allows for

for patients only. And must be non profit. You have no basis to complain about enforcement if they are violating the mj law.

[DeSwiss]

118. Screw that. No one needs to ''pretend'' anything.

Just living in this society is enough to make one ill. In fact, the level of denial we all must contend with and incorporate into our psyches daily, is justification in and of itself for everyone to be smoking a joint at this very moment. And no one has the right to tell me what I can do with my body -- and particularly my consciousness.

- I am not a slave. My body and mind belongs to ME.

[center]
[/center]

[Mojorabbit]

122. Yes it is. Otherwise we would be seeing daily raids of big hedge funds and banks. nt

[tazkcmo]

41. "I can't nullify congressional law"

But I can pick and choose who we bust and I pick pot smokers. They contribute squat to my campaign fund unlike my buddies on Wall Street.

[DeSwiss]

51. You've won a Kewpie Doll!!!

- And the internet for today!!!

[Why Syzygy]

45. Bastards.

Terminate their funding. Most of Congress favors relaxed laws!


edit: I didn't realize I was responding to you. It was meant to be a general reply to the thread.

[Why Syzygy]

49. This is a real reply

to the RS interview.

They want big pharma to get the business. The FDA is approving artificial 'cannabis' as fast as they can.

[rhett o rick]

76. I hope you arent defending that bullshit. One of the most important powers of the executive branch

is the power to determine where resources are used for law enforcement. He can tell the DoJ to use their resources elsewhere. Pres Obama's responsible for cancer patients and MS patient's difficulties in getting drugs that are legal in the state.

This is pure persecution of those that need medical marijuana.

Pres Obama go fight Wall Street and stop persecuting medical marijuana users.

[BobbyBoring]

109. Well

Who is telling DOJ to ignore banksters and other thieves that are stealing this country blind?

[villager]

126. By "change," I guess he meant "from what I'm saying, to what I'll do"

n/t

[ZombieHorde]

2. So fucked up.

Taking people's cancer medicine is disturbing to me.

[kristopher]

20. What makes you think he has the authority to order Justice to not enforce valid laws?

My understanding is that the president can prioritize the agenda to a general degree, but if there is a US Attorney that WANTS to pursue action against someone that is in violation of a criminal statute, as far as I know the president has no authority that allows him/her to order the US Attorney to cease his prosecution.

I'm not a lawyer and I could be wrong, but given the circumstances under which Obama has been operating I wouldn't be surprised if this is more Republican instigated sabotage of his priorities. It is certainly exacting a high political price from him.

If anyone has a solid reference that can clarify whether my understanding is flawed or not, I'd really be interested in reading it.

[AtheistCrusader]

24. Well, because he has.

http://www.towleroad.com/2011/02/breaking-obama-asks-justice-department-to-stop-defending-doma-in-court.html

[pnwmom]

28. He ordered that because of his view that DOMA was unconstitutional.

Is there someone arguing that marijuana laws are unconstitutional?

[John2]

113. Wasn't it President Nixon

that ignored the results of a Congressional Commission on marijuana? You sure the Policy wasn't initiated by the Executive Branch for labeling marijuana the same as other hard drugs?

Is there any research that proves marijuana is as dangerous as cocaine? This is a plant that has been proven to help medical conditions. It is only when you abuse it like alcohol when the problems arises. So can you point to a source claiming this was pushed by Congress or an Executive Order by the Nixon Administration for political purposes? Marijuana was not always illegal.

I think President Obama does not want to take the issue on and passing the buck to Congress. There are people in Congress that want the law change. This is a matter I think he should leave up to the states. If states like California, Washington and Colorado is okay with it for the use of other purposes, I think Obama and the DOJ should butt out and let Congress and the courts fight it out. I think the opponents of legalizing marijuana will lose on the issue and want dare touch the President or Attorney General for ignoring it. President Obama and Eric Holder must believe marijuana is harmful themselves?

Marijuana is a plant. So why are there laws to make this plant illegal? There has to be a justification for making it illegal or it would be illegal under the Constitution. If you allow people in Congress to declare any plant illegal without justification, then you just s well say they can do it to an innocent tree or corn. I don't think it is harmful until you prove it.

[wis vet69]

121. Yes

I am guaranteed the pursue of happiness!

[kristopher]

29. He never ordered anyone not to enforce DOMA while it was a valid law.

He didn't defend in court a law the Executive deemed unconstitutional and even that was very controversial.

I'm pretty sure the expectations are unreasonable that he will, by Executive Order just make a defacto declaration that marijuana is legal.

[AtheistCrusader]

55. But he could order the federal DoJ to stop enforcing it in states where it is explicitly

legal per state law.

[kristopher]

73. He COULD, but it almost certainly wouldn't be consistent with the law.

http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43034.pdf

Read the summary and then skip to page 21.
I haven't read it closely yet, but I'm pretty sure it explains the problem that Obama is facing and how your assumption has ramifications that you may not have considered.

[RainDog]

80. Prosecutorial Discretion

Makes it entirely possible for the Obama administration to decide not to enforce federal law in states that have legalized marijuana completely, or in states that have mmj laws - which, at this time, comes to nearly a third of the population of the nation and includes 19 states and DC.

http://medicalmarijuana.procon.org/view.resource.php?resourceID=000881

It seems to me if state after state tells the federal govt. that citizens choose to regard marijuana as a substance with medicinal benefit, the onus is upon federal govt. to justify ANY use of funds (including distribution to state law enforcement to arrest for marijuana) - iow, not just federal tactics like going after dispensaries via the IRS or their landlords, etc. - but the use of any federal funds to enforce a law based upon lies.

States should also compel their local law enforcement agencies to refuse to enforce federal law - and this issue is implicit in some states - i.e. local LEOs may not enforce federal law that contradicts state law.

Since Congress finally, after a 10 year delay, funded the legislation that was passed to legalize medical marijuana, the issue of the equal protection clause should also come under consideration.

Is it a violation of federal civil rights to deny those residing in non-legal states equal protection under the law when Congress has made it possible to implement the DC legal medical marijuana law?

I hope this issue is one that legalization lawyers will pursue.

All this litigation and all this waste, however, could be avoided simply by instructing the DEA to comply with the overwhelming scientific evidence that indicates cannabis is not a schedule I substance. Or the DEA could take the advice of its own counsel, from 1972, and decriminalize marijuana.

When you have federal agencies that function like fundamentalist creationists in their denial of reality - the problem is the federal agency, not any state laws.

[DeSwiss]

37. Well, I'm not a lawyer either, but.....

...I'd say that it's the same authority that gave him the right to disregard ''Due Process'' and start assassinating Americans.

- Ya think???

[kristopher]

48. No I do not think that is even close to being accurate.

I think it is a shitty (and inaccurate) attempt to keep attacking the President after the basis for this thread's attacks was shown to be Bunk.

You may not agree with the killing of Americans who have overtly joined a group actively engaged in plotting to attack the US, but that doesn't mean it has any similarity at all to the discussion on MJ
Nor does it mean that there is not, in fact, a sound legal basis for his actions re killing malevolent citizens that have expatriated themselves to avoid the reach of the legal system. It may be an UnConstitutional legal framework, but it is the purpose of the Supreme Court to make that judgement.

In any case, he has no authority to order the JD to stand down - no matter how much I wish he did in this particular case.

[DeSwiss]

52. You're entitled to your opinion.....

...and I'm entitled to live in REALITY.


- And most importantly, to live in TRUTH.





Happy trails to you.......

[I love weed]

110. Nobody can really believe that.

Can they? Are you a shill?

[ripcord]

98. Or he could just do the same thing he has done with illegal immigration

[RainDog]

56. The Congressional Research Report disagrees with you

The CRR is the research arm of the federal Congress that takes in-depth looks at policy issues. In 2011, in response to the changes in laws and American opinion regarding legalization (52% in favor, 47% opposed), the CRR on cannabis law says that the Controlled Substances Act did not intend to take away the right of states to regulate their own drug laws.

The issue could be made into a "stand off" between Federal and State power in CO and WA, but, if the Obama administration chooses to do this, they're stupid. You can't blame Republicans, however, since the last two Democratic administrations have arrested more people for possession than their predecessors. I see it as a lack of courage on the part of federal Democrats because the political class, in general, is regressive rather than forward thinking. It takes politicians time to catch up to reality because their jobs are so dependent upon appeasing big money.

This was demonstrated, repeatedly, by a Marijuana Policy Project lobbyist who spoke to members of Congress, in the last decade, about public approval of medical marijuana. Congress people assumed only 30% of their constituents supported medical marijuana. The reality was the reverse because 70% of Americans have supported legal medical marijuana for more than a decade.

The recent total legalization polls indicate this issue is not going to go the way prohibitionists would like.

My concern, or question, is why would Holder make a deal with banks to face a slap on the wrist for laundering money for international drug cartels but raid local state medical marijuana facilities?

Holder has no ground to stand on regarding this issue, because of his actions. He looks entirely corrupt, whatever the reality may be.

If you want references for this, check the drug policy forum, where these various issues are discussed in individual posts. You can also read the Congressional Research Report regarding cannabis online. Google and ye shall find.

[kristopher]

58. Please provide a reference.

It isn't that I don't trust your interpretation of an unseen, nonspecific reference...

Well, actually, yes it is.

If not a specific cite, please provide at least enough information to allow the document to be found by someone easily.

[RainDog]

60. sure. I was hoping you'd actually make your own effort

but, since you won't... here you go.

http://boingboing.net/2013/04/16/congressional-research-service.html

The Congressional Research Service (CRS) is part of the Library of Congress, and it provides "policy and legal analysis to committees and Members of both the House and Senate, regardless of party affiliation." This month the CRS issued a report that says Colorado and Washington (where cannabis is legal, according to state laws) can't be coerced to enforcing federal cannabis laws. "While the federal government can ban what it wants," reports Reason, "the Tenth Amendment allows the states to opt out of participating in the law or assisting in enforcement in any way, leaving federal officials to do the heavy lifting themselves." From the report, State Legalization of Recreational Marijuana: Selected Legal Issues:

Although the federal government may use its power of the purse to encourage states to adopt certain criminal laws, the federal government is limited in its ability to directly influence state policy by the Tenth Amendment, which prevents the federal government from directing states to enact specific legislation, or requiring state officials to enforce federal law. As such, the fact that the federal government has criminalized conduct does not mean that the state, in turn, must also criminalize or prosecute that same conduct.

Here's the full research report from the Congressional Research Service - http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43034.pdf

This link breaks down some of the issues in easily digestible form - http://www.drugwarrant.com/2013/04/congressional-research-service-says-not-much-feds-can-do-about-legalized-marijuana/

The post, above, pulls out many of the relevant quotes regarding this issue.

Congressional Research Service says not much Feds can do about legalized marijuana - more at the link, above.

From the Pew Charitable Trust - http://www.pewstates.org/projects/stateline/headlines/report-no-easy-options-for-feds-in-legal-marijuana-states-85899468191

The federal government may not have much choice but to continue its mellow attitude toward legal marijuana in Washington and Colorado.

New laws legalizing recreational marijuana use in Washington and Colorado probably fall under the states' "power to decide what is criminal and what is not," according to a new report from the Congressional Research Service (CRS). The report analyzes court precedent and lays out what the Justice Department and the Obama administration might do to enforce federal law now that several states have passed marijuana laws that contradict it.

The agency's conclusion: The feds face an array of unappealing options.

The Justice Department could choose to challenge the marijuana laws in federal court, according to CRS. However, the researchers cast doubt on the argument that that the state laws preempt federal authority, or directly violate the intent of the federal Controlled Substances Act, which classifies marijuana as a Schedule I drug, just as dangerous as heroin and LSD.

[kristopher]

69. You cited the paper, it is polite to include a link or titled reference

I thank you for producing it.

I have only skimmed about 5 random pages and this paragraph (forming 1/4 of the author's summary of the content of the paper) is probably the main point, and it doesn't support the interpretation you presented in your first post. Note the underlined sentences:
The Colorado and Washington laws that legalize, regulate, and tax an activity the federal government expressly prohibits appear to be logically inconsistent with established federal policy toward marijuana, and are therefore likely subject to a legal challenge under the constitutional doctrine of preemption. This doctrine generally prevents states from enacting laws that are inconsistent with federal law. Under the Supremacy Clause, state laws that conflict with federal law are generally preempted and therefore void and without effect. Yet Congress intended that the CSA would not displace all state laws associated with controlled substances, as it wanted to preserve a role for the states in regulating controlled substances. States thus remain free to pass laws relating to marijuana, or any other controlled substance,so long as they do not create a “positive conflict” with federal law, such that the two laws “cannot consistently stand together.”
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R43034.pdf

There is certain degree of legal tension that can exist, but the intent of the federal law (to prevent the trafficking of MJ) trumps the trend by the states to make MJ widely available for recreational use.

I'd love to see MJ made legal; I've been waiting 45 years for that to happen. It used to be because I wanted to smoke it in peace, but as I've aged and observed what the War on Drugs has done to the US and the world, I've come to consider it one of the supremely evil policies in the world. It is a fundamental tool of authoritarianism and oppression.

I'm disappointed by the fact that there hasn't been as much progress under Obama as I'd hoped for, but I lay the blame squarely at the feet of the most obstructive Congress in the history of the US. Their efforts have completely stalled the movement towards a more progressive country that the collapse of conservatism under Bush, and the resulting landslide for the alternative authorized.

In normal times, fighting the battle to legalize Mj would have been worth fighting at the presidential level. But in a time where the opposition is so insane as to be intent on crashing the economy when they don't get every crazy thing they ask for, I can't blame the man for putting it on a back burner. That is a victory for them, but it is an even greater victory for them when simple minded fools blame the good guys for the shit the bad guys are responsible for.

[RainDog]

70. you're welcome

I was just talking about the issue off the top of my head and didn't want to go find all the links.

But your underlined portion -

Yet Congress intended that the CSA would not displace all state laws associated with controlled substances, as it wanted to preserve a role for the states in regulating controlled substances. States thus remain free to pass laws relating to marijuana, or any other controlled substance,so long as they do not create a “positive conflict” with federal law, such that the two laws “cannot consistently stand together.”

... is exactly what I said.

how do you think this statement differs from what I said?

[kristopher]

71. Obama is aligned with the entirety of the opinion

Not one selected portion. You say he can stop enforcement, but this says he can't. Where there is a gray area, such as allowing the state to provide for medicinal use, there is no "positive conflict" created. He has, through the chain of command, provided explicit guidance that exploits that gray area.
However, when the agenda moves to cultivation and distribution for recreational use, then there is a clear conflict that allows any US Atty to pursue a course of investigation and prosecution and there is nothing Obama can do about it.

Stop blaming him and lay the onus where it belongs - on the Republican Obstructionists.

We won the election but to continue getting their way they are using unheard of, outrageous tactics that amount to a temper tantrum.

Blame them.

Unceasingly.

It is the "reasonable" position.

[RainDog]

75. This is not a partisan issue

This is where you are totally misconstruing evidence.

The breakdown on this issue lies with social conservatives (in both parties, tho Democrats OVERWHELMINGLY support legalization.. in the 70 percentile) versus liberals, libertarians and economic conservatives.

The groups that influence policy but remain "quietly obstructive" are the DEA, military contractors and law enforcement agencies at state levels - and their concerns are all about maintaining their cash flow from taxes Americans pay for a war on drugs they don't want. The alcoholic bev. industry also works, and has for years, to keep marijuana illegal because they don't want the competition from a safer recreational substance.

The reality is that the war on cannabis, specifically, is a giant federal taxation suck that is racist in its application. This nation has wasted BILLIONS of dollars to prohibit a substance that is safer than alcohol. This is simply corruption and/or stupidity.

It's true that some asshole from Texas, Lamar Smith, iirc, kept a Frank/Paul decriminalization bill holed up in his judiciary committee office until the session expired during the first Obama term, but, currently, Democrats in Congress have two bills to both remove cannabis from the CSA and put it under control of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms, and to provide a tax structure for legal cannabis. Republicans have sponsored bills to remove hemp (or non-psychotropic cannabis) from the CSA and to make it legal for farmers to, once again, grow hemp as a cash crop.

The first legal hemp crop since WWII was recently planted in Colorado. Opposition to hemp is not based upon its recreational value because there is none. Again, prohibition has been entirely about favoring fat cat industries at the expense of Americans' well being, as the restrictions against hemp indicate.

If you read what I have said - I'm not blaming Obama. I'm just not letting him off the hook for his REFUSAL to address this issue. This issue is the one that has garnered the most support via online communication with the president via petitions. Under his administration, more people have been arrested for simple possession than any other. These arrests, for the most part, take place at the state/local level, but his refusal to address this issue allows this to happen. That's the simple fact and, no matter how much you protest that others shouldn't say anything about it, the reality is that his hypocrisy on this issue makes him look bad.

And, again, Holder going after legal local dispensaries is the height of hypocrisy when he has no problem letting big banks get away with money laundering for criminal organizations. As the head of the DoJ, Holder has indicated, once again, that his priorities lie with those who have money and how he can protect them from situations that would land ordinary Americans in jail for a long time.

So, the problem is that, even if Republicans may offer obstructions, the Obama administration doesn't care about the legal rights of LIBERALS who, overwhelmingly, are the ones who have voted to change laws in this land to make them less oppressive and more aligned with human rights regarding a substance that offers major medical benefits for people for a variety of conditions, and offers a safer alternative to alcohol.

Since you have no evidence to support your claim that Republicans are forcing Obama to treat this topic as he has, and since the reality is that cannabis could be removed from the controlled substances act by fiat, so to speak, by the AG, you simply don't want to admit that the administration has consistently sided with the tax hogs at the DEA, within the military contracting industry, and with the big banks that make money from large, international illegal organizations.

But that's the reality.

Obama has said Congress needs to address this issue. I agree. But he could also use his office to move the issue forward and he chooses not to do this.

You know what really makes me ill about apologists for Democrats? The Republicans get into office and they don't give a shit about the other side of the political divide. They cut taxes, remove health care options for poor women, insist on creationist bullshit for children... yet ask a Democrat to side on the side of science and reason and... well, it's just too much to ask because of those mean old Republicans.

The reality is that those assholes are going to attack no matter what a Democrat does. The sooner people decide to tell them to fuck off, the better off we'll all be.

[MindMover]

78. I just heard that Obama is going to give us all a job and help the middle class ....

and stop the hurricanes and heal the sick and help the wounded and cure the climate and stop the goons from arresting all our children and ruining their lives forever and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and and ..... right, like every other politician from tricky dicky to shifty braackie, they gonna fix it all .... LMAO .... the truth is, the rich will keep on getting richer .... and the poor will keep on getting poorer .... and everyone else is getting hosed ....

[RainDog]

79. This issue is going to go for legalization

People have worked, via lobbyists and lawyers, activist groups, and through scientific research to establish that the CSA is bad law.

At the time the CSA was implemented, it was considered bad law by the DEA's own judge who did the most comprehensive review of any substance ever in the history of American politics. And still, the advice of lawyers, doctors, scientists and human rights activists was ignored because marijuana prohibition was founded on the principle of racism (the chief argument for prohibition was that marijuana made black folks think they were equal to whites... that from the govts' mouthpiece at the time) to Nixon's desire to punish his enemies, to the current for-profit prison system that uses marijuana law to incarcerate more black men than at the time of slavery.

And now it turns out that cannabis is one of the foremost natural substances that offers medical benefits for a multitude of illnesses, so the ONLY acceptable reason (no medical benefit) is a lie.

Americans are sick of this shit.

I can't predict a timetable, but this issue, like the issue of equal rights for homosexuals, has reached a breaking point at a time when information availability makes it increasingly hard for politicians to protect their cash cows at the expense of the health of the American people.

What the federal govt. is doing now is fostering disrespect for the law. When laws are based upon lies and are clearly kept in place to pay off lobbyists at the expense of the American people - well, who really cares what such a person has to say?

Respect is earned.

[MindMover]

81. Prohibition ruined a lot of lives and we learned nothing from that gargantuan fuckup ....

[RainDog]

83. The break up of prohibition altered the power base within the Democrats

FDR won the presidency because he sided with the "wets" or anti-prohibitionists, against the "drys" or prohibitionists. The "wets" were concentrated in urban areas of the northeast. As a political faction within the Democratic Party, FDR's win was a blow to the south and midwest - the primary location of "drys."

So, I wonder if this current situation is the beginning of a power shift within the democratic party toward the west. California is a huge state whose population dwarfs entire regions of this nation - including the ENTIRE northeast region.

Democrats can appeal to economic conservatives via the marijuana issue - and did, in Colorado's last election. That legalization law passed with bipartisan votes from the public.

The cost savings from repealing marijuana prohibition - simply the costs of prohibition itself, not any associated, if any, tax captured from legalization, runs into the billions.

In addition, the office of the Drug Czar could be eliminated as part of the federal bureaucracy. The office's efforts have been a failure, but they pay a lot of salaries to maintain this failure. These are the sorts of economic issues that Democrats can use to appeal to conservatives.

Since most Americans have family members who have experienced cancer, and since most Americans approve of legal medical marijuana because of the twenty-year use of cannabis for cancer treatment (unofficially) in the U.S., this is another route to appeal to older Americans who have a self interest in affordable and effective health options - without fear of arrest and with availability that provides adequate information about conditions in which something was grown, etc.

The Attn Gen of Utah, for example, came out in support of medical marijuana after he had been dx'd with cancer. He claims he didn't use mj, but saw its value for his fellow patients who had used mmj as an adjunct to chemo and to avoid wasting - which is one of the main causes of death during cancer treatment.

So, even religious conservatives can understand this issue when it impacts them or their loved ones directly.

The greatest obstacle to sensible law concerning this issue is within the beltway.

[MindMover]

111. I really enjoy your writing and thoughts ...and hope that you are writing or speaking

to a larger audience than DU. Thank you for your continued rational insight into these issues . and thankyou for being a member of DU where I can partake of your efforts to clarify these huge issues ....

[RainDog]

116. thanks

The only place I write or speak about this issue is here on DU.

But if anyone would like to hire me, I would definitely be interested.

I've put in a lot of hours reading up on this topic, trying to understand various aspects - but I'm an amateur. I have written professionally in the past, but not about this. The topic is interesting to me because I see this as a time when a cultural shift is taking place and it's interesting to see this occur.

[TheKentuckian]

124. Yep, Obama is desperately trying to end the drug war but the dastardly TeaPubliKlans

are blocking him at every turn!

They also won't allow him to stop dragnet surveillance of peaceable citizens here and around the globe. They keep forcing education deform on him. They shove drones down his throat. They force him to persecute whistle blowers at a record pace. They made him deport more migrants than Bush in less than half the time. They have muscled him into secret "free trade" negotiations. The beat goes on and on.

I'm not saying they are not obstructionist in the extreme because they sure as hell are but it isn't a catch all proposition.

Chiefly, the playground for obstruction is in policies that Republicans have traditionally accepted as reasonable tools for government to utilize in the economy but now act desperately to withhold because they think they will work which gives the opposition "wins" and siphons their branding which puts them in a position of consensus or forces them to a further extreme because there is not enough room politically to rationalize new policy tools between the previously supported minimal and corporate friendly ones now adopted by Democrats and none at all so in order to remain oppositional they have been pushed to none at all.

Thus, the espoused DLC strategy has failed. Rather than reaching consensus and some pie in the sky "happy medium", we have been forced to embrace positions that we opposed as the only alternative to radical, far right insanity that not long ago was considered extreme by the Republicans.
Sadly, this was the actual DLC strategy and it has succeeded beyond all hope. The effective political spectrum is entirely on the corporate embracing right, damn near a Goldwater/Buckley coalition with influences from Eisenhower versus a Thurmond/Falwell coalition built on the confederacy both deeply neocon.

Essentially, a right wing consensus that is undecided about maybe three things-if government is a tool to leverage corporate dominance or if government is an obstacle to such dominance. Should the right wing consensus be secular or theocratic in its nature. If the ruling class should reflect society demographically or be restricted to whites (which I think the love of globalization has made this one already over but is being played to hold a political block that can't be lost or Democrats would have no cover to press the agenda).

[RainDog]

64. would you also like links for arrest stats for various administrations?

or a link to an article about Holder letting off big banks for laundering drug money?

I can also link to a report from Democratic Senator Claire Maccaskill that notes the war on drugs is a failure and serves as a way to funnel money to defense contractors, too, if you would like.

Or, again, you can find links to these articles in the Drug Policy Forum.

[red dog 1]

72. In his 2008 campaign, President Obama VOWED he would not "use Justice Dept.resources to try

...and circumvent state laws about medical marijuana"

There is a plethora of articles to back this up,

all one needs to do is to Google "Obama Orders Raids On Medical Pot Dispensaries"
and "Obama Breaks Promise Not To Raid Medical Pot Dispensaries"

[kristopher]

74. That is a misquote.

The actual position, as it was actually stated, appears several times in this thread. I'll leave it to you to read the thread.

[red dog 1]

119. "I would not have the Justice Department prosecuting and raiding medical marijuana users.

It's not a good use of our resources." August 21, 2007, campaign event in Nashua, N.H.

"You know, it's really not a good use of Justice Department resources." -- responding to whether the federal government should stop medical marijuana raids, August 13, 2007,
town hall meeting in Nashua, New Hampshire.

"I don't think that should be a top priority of us, raiding people who are using....medical marijuana. .With all the things we've got to worry about, and our Justice Department should be doing, that probably shouldn't be a high priority." -- June 2, 2007, town hall meeting in
Laconia, New Hampshire.

"The Justice Department going after sick individuals using marijuana as a palliative instead of going after serious criminals makes no sense." -- July 21, 2007, town hall meeting in Manchester,
New Hampshire.

http://www.gazette.com/obama-promised-to-respect-medical-marijuana/article/117589/

[JoeyT]

82. Lack of bankers and war criminals in prison.

We only prosecute the powerless because we have courage.

[Richard D]

99. Seems to me . . .

That there are thousand of laws on the books that are not being enforced. At all.

[Betsy Ross]

3. This is the one thing that bothers me most about the President

He has totally broken a promise that could so easily have been kept. Didn't need agreement from Congress. Didn't need funding. He just had to do nothing, or tell the Justice Department to do nothing. So while there are many other important issues facing this administration, President Obama failed at the easiest.

[questionseverything]

27. ...

plus 1

[kristopher]

30. He kept his promise

Marijuana Resource Center: Federal Laws Pertaining to Marijuana

Department of Justice Guidelines:
The Department of Justice (DOJ) issued guidance for Federal prosecutors in states that have enacted laws authorizing the medical use of marijuana under state law. The guidelines explain that it is likely not an efficient use of federal resources to focus enforcement efforts on individuals with serious illnesses who use marijuana as part of a recommended treatment regimen consistent with applicable state law or their individual non-commercial caregiver. However, persons who are in the business of cultivating, selling, or distributing marijuana, and those who knowingly facilitate such activities, are in violation of Federal law, and are subject to Federal enforcement action, including potential prosecution.

The DOJ guidelines do not legalize marijuana. The DOJ guidance explicitly states that marijuana remains illegal under Federal law. Enforcing Federal law against significant traffickers in illegal drugs including marijuana remains a core Department of Justice priority.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/ondcp/federal-laws-pertaining-to-marijuana

[DeSwiss]

40. Which one?

He's made so many ''promises'' over the years, it's hard to keep them straight. In fact the only one that I know for certain that he's kept is the one where he described himself as an 80's Republican.

- That one he's kept.

[Warren DeMontague]

77. Wow, how "reasonable" of them to suggest they won't explicitly look to bust grannies in wheelchairs

for smoking a single joint.



If it happens, though, too fucking bad, right? Enjoy prison, Granny! ....that'll teach you to try to mediate your chemo nausea with a plant in the privacy of your own home! HOW DARE YOUUUUUUUUU

[wordpix]

47. coupled with his total disregard of Koch Bros dumping in Ark and now the Detroit River bank

The Koch Bros are not just super-rich pricks, they are breaking Clean Water Act laws in a way that is causing people cancer in Arkansas and the Kochs put petroleum coke piles 4 stories high on the Detroit R without a permit. Meanwhile the DOJ looks the other way while they go raiding mj dispensaries. I'm bothered, too, to say the least

[ConcernedCanuk]

94. Koch Bros are above the law - dincha know that?

.
.
.

They got more power than Obama.

Sad state of affairs, that.

But true.

CC

[wordpix]

96. apparently that's what Obama, EPA and DOJ think

[Lonr]

66. Sad

but true

[hobbit709]

4. But if we criticize this we are called "haters"

I just keep in mind what TR said about criticizing the president and I don't give a damn if some people don't like that.

[FreeState]

6. +1

[CountAllVotes]

10. and that my friend ...

is your absolute right as a citizen of the USA.

And yes, I agree, this is major ^^^'d up.

Shades of Dr. Jeckyl & Mr. Hyde dare I suggest??

[Doctor_J]

13. I thought we're Glen Greenwald Libertarians

[hobbit709]

16. That's the latest bad name of the day. It all fits under the generic term "haters"

[Doctor_J]

17. It's comforting to know I'm not a racist any more

actually I might be. 34 DUers have me on ignore, so probably most of those who think I'm a racist don't get to read my Pulitzer-quality brain droppings any more.

[hobbit709]

18. I'm up to 18 at this point, which I find a source of great amusement.

[tazkcmo]

44. I don't post much

But been reading here for several years and I have nobody on my ignore list. It just seems so UD. (Un-Democratic)

[Throd]

5. I actually thought this shit would end under the Obama presidency. Boy, was I ever wrong.

[dusty trails]

8. I fear ....

... we were wrong about Obama on a number of issues.
I'd switch from Dem to a 3rd party if I didn't think I would waste my vote.

[Scairp]

9. Unfortunately I was not

My worst fears about an Obama presidency have pretty much come to pass. I wanted Hillary. I still do, if she is still up for it.

[Wilms]

32. And she was going to be much different?

Her wiki policy page "Hillary Clinton has pledged to end medical marijuana raids against users in states in which the use is legal."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Hillary_Rodham_Clinton#Medical_marijuana_and_marijuana_decriminalization

But the BBC page used for a reference is a dead link...

http://bbsnews.net/article.php/20070717133158914

Here's a more recent item.

snip

Clinton also commented on the recent passage of historic measures in Colorado and Washington legalizing the recreational use of marijuana.

"We are formulating our own response to the votes of two of our states as you know -- what that means for the federal system, the federal laws and law enforcement," she said.

Marijuana is still illegal at the federal level.

snip

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/30/hillary-clinton-drug-legalization-war_n_2218072.html


I never understand what some assume would be substantially different with either of them as POTUS.

[Scairp]

63. I meant overall

As president, Hillary would have had a much better understanding of how Washington works. Obama had not been there long enough. Even though I voted for him twice, I have always felt that a partial term in the Senate was not nearly enough experience inside the Beltway to deal with that nest of vipers and I think my opinion has been proven correct. He thought he could go to Washington and work with the other side much like they (used to), do in the Senate and he has found out the hard way that it isn't that way when it comes to the office of the president. And no one knows for sure how Hillary would have handled this particular situation but we know what Obama said and how he has actually handled it, and we know the two things are polar opposites.

[Chakab]

65. Oh please. Hillary is just as much as an establishment hack as Obama is.

n/t

[RainDog]

67. the reality is that the work gets done by activists

if someone wants to make a difference, they do so at the level of activism, outside of the power structure of D.C. This has been the case for at least half a century.

Those in D.C. are careerists whose first and most important goal is their own financial and social gain and the needs and wishes of the voter are secondary to appeasing the powerful who fund campaigns. This isn't a situation created by Democrats, but all operate under those same constraints - both parties are the parties of big business and have been for decades.

Hillary is more of an establishment hack than Obama, in fact.

If she's the demo candidate, I'll vote for her because the option is so much worse, but people should simply accept that politicians are not leaders regarding policy that matters for Americans' well being.

That sort of action goes on within groups outside of govt. that use the power of the many to work for a better world for all.

Why do people think Al Gore didn't want to stay in politics? Because it's such a corrupt little circle jerk of power brokers, imo.

[eilen]

132. LOTE Voting is soooooo 2012.

This is a system that is non-functional. An election of non-choices--
corporate tool #1 or corporate tool #2. The elite aren't measuring success by how many slaves, houses, jets or cash in off shore accounts anymore, it is how many politicians in their pocket.

[RainDog]

133. I disagree. Voting matters A LOT

voting matters. activism becomes law because voters vote for those who will incorporate the wishes of their fellow citizens.

voting is how we now have an assault on women's reproductive health care - because the religious right is motivated to get out and vote to shit on women and try to move them to second-class citizenship in this nation.

but politicians are not ahead of activists - activists set the agendas.

the problem with DC is that there are too few people with too much money who decide for too many citizens against their wishes.

but voting also matters for supreme court judges, for too many things to mention.

but activists are going to be ahead of the pols on issues of policy change - when those changes don't benefit the wealthy - but then, yeah, everyone falls all over themselves to do the bidding of the wealthy.

Republicans are a thousand times worse than Democrats in office because their base is made up of religious extremists with the worst intentions for this nation.

[Scairp]

86. Wow

Haven't you people EVER paid attention to anything she has said or done over the past 30+ years? I can't believe these statements. You really are clueless about her.

[Orrex]

7. Whew! Now I feel safer!

[Brewinblue]

14. You should!

Reefer Madness is REAL, and it KILLS!!!!1

[RussBLib]

107. and so why were they raided?

Ostensibly in past raids the rationale was the dispensary was operating outside of the rules in some fashion. I doubt that they were raided simply because "marijuana is still illegal under federal law."

There is no need to get all wound up if in fact the raid was to address some kind of irregularity or illegality going on. I presume the feds did not raid EVERY dispensary in Washington state, right?

There has to be some reason to raid them.

Seeing everyone getting so wound up gets pretty old.

[RussBLib]

108. sorry, I meant to post this reply to the OP, not here.

oops.

[blkmusclmachine]

11. Medical marijuana, now that's something Holder will go after.

Everything else...

[Bluenorthwest]

12. He directly told us in Oregon that he would not 'waste resouces' raiding

dispensaries the States call legal. Said fighting terrorism was more important, but the letters went out warning of these raids the week after Boston was bombed and locked down and searched like a bad memory.
Here is the Q and the A:

Would you stop the DEA's raids on Oregon medical marijuana growers?

I would because I think our federal agents have better things to do, like catching criminals and preventing terrorism.
http://www.wweek.com/portland/article-9003-six_minutes_with_barack.html

Very mendacious and dishonest. Total disrespect for voters who were turning out for him in droves. Disgraceful.

[Doctor_J]

15. He also said he'd insist on single payer/public option

and wouldn't advocate for the chained CPI for SS benefits, and would let the Bush tax cuts expire.

He pissed all over us.

[matthews]

38. And yet he thinks we should trust him.

I hope that vote today told him something. I wonder where he ever got the idea that people weren't going to get sick and tired of being lied to? That says a lot about the guy.

[burnodo]

93. I dont know what he thinks

but certainly others think we should trust him even as he betrays previous statements and promises

[msongs]

19. democracy and the will of the people mean nothing to the "feds" on this issue nt

[Freddie Stubbs]

91. So, any federal law can be nullified if the voters of a state say so?

[nebenaube]

112. When a law make the majority criminals, then it's the law that is criminal. n/t

[Freddie Stubbs]

123. What is the case law on that legal theory?

[nebenaube]

130. Show me just cause where possession of pot is a crime.

Or how the entire prohibition isn't a bill of attainder.

[Freddie Stubbs]

135. Has anyone avoided a conviction by arguing that?

[theaocp]

21. And I'm fairly sure I saw the defenders

give links indicating that he stopped this in his first term. Ah, well. I'm sure he'll get around to it, because, as he so eloquently put it, it could have been him, not so long ago, right?

[PatrynXX]

22. The DEA works for the Mexican cartel

That'd be the only real reason they'd do it.

[postatomic]

23. result of a two year investigation???!!!!????

Just when I start feeling good about this country stupid shit like this happens. I have to repeat it; the DEA spent two years investigating this. Totally fucked up. How difficult would it be to "investigate" a dispensary?

[PatrynXX]

25. hence

someone in Mexico was losing money so the DEA had to make up that excuse so now the drug lords are happy

[AtheistCrusader]

26. Typical of the Federal Government, sorry to say.

http://www.gunreports.com/news/news/ATF-BATFE-Straw-Purchasers_1512-1.html?CMP=OTC-RSS

Six months and 37 firearms delivered into felon's hands. All it took was ONE for a conviction. Thirty-seven. Six months.

To net two bad guys.

[Nanjing to Seoul]

33. Potheads. . .America's most dangerous criminals. They murder. . .twinkies! one box at a time.

This is where Ron Paul and I agree (one of select few). END THE FUCKING DRUG WAR!!!

[ConcernedCanuk]

95. USA's war on drugs has a real purpose, especially regardin MJ - MIC priority

.
.
.

How many people would go to war if they were allowed to mellow out on the evil weed?

Not too many (I know none) get violent when under the influence of the evil weed.

Booze? - go for it - lot's of violence happens there . . .

oh - ya furgot potato chips and cheezies

. . . . . . . . . . .



CC

[stevil]

128. Yay!!!!

Cheezies! Haven't heard them called that in a while. Hope that MMJ users can continue to do so. The clinics in my area are full of legitimate patients (myself included).

[Billy Pilgrim]

34. Obama would not have legal precedent to block the DEA from enforcing federal law.

Obama is not the problem. The DEA is the problem.

[kristopher]

35. +1

You'd think with the internet more people would understand the basics of how their government functions.

[Comrade Grumpy]

53. The Justice Department shifted position in 2011 with the Cole memo...

http://www.freedomisgreen.com/full-text-department-of-justice-memo-on-medical-marijuana/

...which superseded the 2009 Ogden memo telling Justice to back off.

Yes, the president and the attorney general can set enforcement priorities. They are choosing to enforce. Bad on them.

[Doctor_J]

54. Then why did he say he would stop them?

See reply 12

[RainDog]

57. The DEA is THE problem

but not the only problem.

Holder could call for rescheduling hearings tomorrow to move cannabis from schedule I to schedule III (which is what a recent govt. sponsored scientific report recommended.) I don't buy the argument he has more important things to do when he could take the time to make a deal to let off big banks that were laundering money for drug cartels.

Democrats in Congress have worked on legislation to change the schedule for cannabis, too.

Their proposal would remove cannabis ENTIRELY from the jurisdiction of the DEA and move to to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (and, then, Marijuana.)

But the war on drugs supplies a lot of money to military contractors, state law enforcement agencies. Easy possession arrests fluff the stats for LEOs, and money to military contractors under the guise of the war on drugs allows various agencies, like the CIA, to funnel money to groups in other nations (like Reagan did with the Contras and his funding of the Taliban.)

A 2011 Senate subcommittee report, lead by Claire Maccaskill (D-MO), noted that most federal monies for the war on drugs is unaccounted for - and goes into the coffers of military contractors.

No doubt, Dynacorp doesn't want their free federal money train interrupted.

I see the current intractable position at the federal level as just another example of corruption.

[forestpath]

42. DISGUSTING. Is there anything Obama hasn't lied about?

[DeSwiss]

59. He said that today, he'd be seen as an 80's Republican.

- That was true.

[forestpath]

101. He seems to take great pride in describing himself as a Republican.

[Jesus Malverde]

61. Updates

Feds raid medical marijuana dispensaries in Washington state — where possession is legal
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/24/19664590-feds-raid-medical-marijuana-dispensaries-in-washington-state-where-possession-is-legal

DEA Raids Washington Medical Marijuana Dispensaries in Renewed Crackdown
http://www.thedailychronic.net/2013/24827/dea-raids-washington-medical-marijuana-dispensaries-in-renewed-crackdown/

Feds bust one medical marijuana collective in Olympia Wednesday
http://www.theolympian.com/2013/07/24/2637228/feds-bust-one-medical-marijuana.html#storylink=cpy

Feds raid medical marijuana shops in Seattle, Tacoma, Olympia
http://mynorthwest.com/11/2320786/Feds-raid-medical-marijuana-shops-in-Seattle-Tacoma-Olympia

Feds Raid Pot Dispensaries in Washington, Where the Drug is Legal
http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/07/feds-raid-pot-dispenaries-washington-where-drug-legal/67585/

Federal drug enforcers raid marijuana dispensaries
http://www.bizjournals.com/seattle/news/2013/07/24/drug-enforcers-operating-in-puget.html

[colsohlibgal]

68. Not A Path To Hold The Progressive Base

First another helping of Larry Summers now this. All following a big dab of Penny Pritzger. Barry is following Bubba as republican lite masquerading as a democrat.

Obama talks a great game but does little to back any of it up.

[Blue Palasky]

84. you're a cool guy, mr. president!!1

[Sunlei]

87. really sucks. The state collects taxes, fees. Provides the Feds with easy list of names and address.

[RandiFan1290]

88. Obama Lied!

[Divernan]

89. DEA to legalize MJ chemical for Big Pharma; keep it a crime for everyone else(2011).

(NaturalNews) Have no illusions about the true nature of the so-called "War on Drugs" and the actions of the DEA. The War on Drugs has always been about protecting the profits of the drug companies which have a long and well-documented history of copying street drugs, repackaging them as "medications" and selling them to children as FDA-approved drugs (see below).

Today, yet another example emerges as the DEA moves to legalize THC in Big Pharma's pills while simultaneously making it illegal for anyone else to grow, sell or possess THC. The DEA, you see, is working to change the classification of THC from a schedule I substance (like street heroin) to a schedule III drug (pharmaceuticals). So if Big Pharma grows its own marijuana plants, extracts the THC and puts it into a "pot pill," those pills will be perfectly legal. They're already FDA approved, actually, when made with the synthetic version of THC.

But if a guy grows the very same chemical in his backyard, then extracts THC from those plants -- even for his own personal use -- suddenly he's guilty of committing a federal crime and will likely be subjected to an armed raid by DEA agents.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031489_DEA_legalized_marijuana.html#ixzz2a3Z40lY9

[Divernan]

92. DEA described as "armed enforcement branch of Big Pharma"

Sort of like this: the FDA legalizes Big Pharma drug dealing, the DEA eliminates the competition and bob's-your-uncle, profits soar for those generous campaign contributors, i.e, Big Pharma. It's yet another instance of corporate welfare - an indirect but extremely lucrative boost to bottom line profits of Big Pharma.

The real job of the DEA, you see, is not to protect people from dangerous drugs, but rather to protect the profits of Big Pharma by shooting, arresting or otherwise destroying anything that competes with Big Pharma. Namely, street dealers of marijuana.

It's not the first time the DEA has done this, of course. Drugs that used to be sold on the street as "speed" are now FDA-approved pharmaceutical medications for ADHD -- and they're being prescribed to children by the tens of millions!

Every successful drug operation needs henchmen who run around with guns eliminating the competition. In a drug gang, that used to be the job of "Frankie" back in the Sicilian mob days. But today, with Big Pharma, it's the job of the DEA.

Hilariously, this announcement by the DEA was posted by their "Office of Diversion Control" (http://www.deadiversion.usdoj.gov/fed_regs/rules/2010/fr1101.htm). For once, they're honest: It is a diversion! A diversion to prevent people from realizing the truth about the DEA, the War on Drugs and the pharmaceutical industry.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031489_DEA_legalized_marijuana.html#ixzz2a3Zi6HKb

[Le Taz Hot]

90. Washington now???

Not ONE FUCKING BANKSTER in jail but this administration sure can find the pot smokers. Obama has FAR MORE MM dispensary busts than George W. Bush. Now THERE's a record to be proud of!

[warrant46]

131. The Banksters have powerful Lawyers

And Holder and his posse go after the Low Hanging Fruit

[socialist_n_TN]

97. Can we hope for a jury nullification? I don't know the law on this....

Is it a jury trial or is it a judge only trial? Is the jurisdiction for the trial in the area? Or can they change the venue to Nebraska or Alabama?

[former9thward]

103. Judge or jury is a defendant option.

The trial would take place in the federal district court located in the area where the raids took place. From the link it does not appear there were any charges. It looks like they were gathering evidence to present to a federal grand jury.

[Javaman]

100. honestly, what do these raids solve?

other than face time for the feds and making peoples lives miserable, what good does this serve?

[1Greensix]

102. Jury nullification is the answer

Washington jurors need to demonstrate to the Feds that they will NOT convict for possession of sale in Washington, no matter what Obama wants them to do.

[wildbilln864]

105. Absolutely!

The public needs to be more informed about jury nullification. I've sat in court may times here in SC and heard a judge tel jurors they cannot decide whether the law was just only they must convict or not based on the evidence of a crime....Didn't know then the judge was decieving the jury until I read about jury nullification....

[John2]

114. If they put me on a jury and bring this nonsense to me, the DOJ will be wasting our money.

I'm all for jury nullification in this case.

[on point]

104. So pot is a priority but war criminals and Wall Street are not?

[wildbilln864]

106. is it fascism yet? n/t

[wordpix]

125. you forgot to add environmental criminals getting away with dumping toxics

all free for them ---our air, water, soil, roads, highways, bridges, and no one takes them to task.

[99th_Monkey]

115. Holder's Retribution for Voting to Legalize pot??

Hell Washington just passed a law for full legalization of pot.

This is just so WRONG, WRONG, WRONG

[DeSwiss]

127. They want to have it both ways.....

They want to appear as if they are a caring and understanding bunch of guys who can relate to those who are suffering from deadly diseases and undergoing painful and horrendous therapies to try and stay alive.

They're lying sacks of shit. They give less than a damn. Causing senseless pain and suffering because they're uncaring, insensitive, greedy, mofos. For those unfamiliar with the concept -- This. Is. The. Truth.

- I'm going with the pure stuff, from here on out.

K&R

This is the Obama Administration's totally hypocritical cannabis policy:

''I'm not going after medical marijuana users who have serious illnesses and medical problems, I'm just the going after the major marijuana suppliers who's products they buy and are, of course, helping to keep these people alive. But that's a totally different thing, see?''

*** - And before anyone tries to claim that they have no choice but to obey and enforce the law, I'll remind them of the dead Americans who were droned-down and never got their ''Due Process.'' So you can that one.

[RainDog]

129. These dispensaries may be in violation of state law

It's good to fight the fight for reasonable laws - but if the dispensaries were in violation of state law, the state v. federal isn't an issue in this case. The issue is further clarifying law at the state level, which is where such law can be done at this time.

http://www.mhpbooks.com/breaking-news-amazon-declares-war-on-book-industry/

On Wednesday, federal agents from the Drug Enforcement Agency raided several marijuana dispensaries in Washington's Puget Sound region. It's tempting to interpret the crackdown as a threat to state-sanctioned legalization for adults older than 21. Nonetheless, activists and experts on the ground tell AlterNet that while it's too early to make a judgement, it appears likely that the dispensaries targeted may have been violating state, not just federal law. Moreover, strict regulations embedded in Washington's more sweeping legalization model (and absent from its medical policy) may protect the state from federal intervention once the pot shops open up.

[zonkers]

134. Lame. Foolish. Bad for economy. Good for Big Pharma.

will no longer be injected into