Obama and Holder Then and Now on Medical Marijuana

By Jeralyn, Section Crime Policy
Posted on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 05:46:51 PM EST
Tags: medical marijuana (all tags)

Share This: Digg!

In 2004, Barack Obama said the drug war was "an utter failure" and we need to rethink it.

In New Hampshire in 2007, he said he would not have the Justice Department prosecute medical marijuana.

Obama during the presidential campaign: He won't use Justice Department resources to circumvent state laws. He wants them to focus on violent crime and terrorism.

[More...]

Eric Holder saying what Obama said about ending raids during the campaign will be DOJ policy:

In March, 2009, the New York Times reports Holder said "the administration would effectively end the Bush administration’s frequent raids on distributors of medical marijuana." (my emphasis.)

Speaking with reporters, Mr. Holder provided few specifics but said the Justice Department’s enforcement policy would now be restricted to traffickers who falsely masqueraded as medical dispensaries and “use medical marijuana laws as a shield.”

...Mr. Holder said the new approach was consistent with statements made by President Obama in the campaign and was based on an assessment of how to allocate scarce enforcement resources. He said dispensaries operating in accord with California law would not be a priority for the administration. (my emphasis.)

What hypocrites.

< Feds Target Calfornia Marijuana Dispensaries | The Occupy Movement And The Elites >

Legal

Nothing on this site should be construed as legal advice. TalkLeft does not give legal advice.

TalkLeft is not responsible for and often disagrees with material posted in the comments section. Read at your own risk.

Obama and Holder Then and Now on Medical Marijuana | 23 comments (23 topical)

Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

he'll say anything to get elected (5.00 / 3) (#2)
by kempis on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 06:14:37 PM EST

Remember when part of his big contrast between himself and Hillary was "she'll say anything to get elected."

That was back when he was all about turning the page, a new politics, blah blah blah.

Turns out he said all that stuff because, wait for it, it's what it took for him to get elected.

And I'm not as angry with him as I am with those who really, really believed that crap.

A few of my favs: (5.00 / 2) (#3)
by lentinel on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 06:35:15 PM EST

- "Make no mistake: we will close Guantánamo prison, which has damaged our national-security interests and become a tremendous recruiting tool for Al Qaeda."
Obama - January 2010

- [A]ny plan I sign must include an insurance exchange: a one-stop shopping marketplace where you can compare the benefits, cost and track records of a variety of plans - including a public option to increase competition and keep insurance companies honest - and choose what's best for your family.
Obama - July 2009

yep, (none / 0) (#9)
by cpinva on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 06:51:37 AM EST

funny how that works.

the best thing pres. obama has going for him, with regards to 2012, is the republican party.


: It (none / 0) (#20)
by lentinel on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 03:53:33 PM EST

is the ONLY thing going for him.
And frankly, for me, it is not nearly enough to get me to vote for him. No way.
I can't know, of course, but I would posit the notion that had McCain been elected, we might be out of Iraq and Afghanistan by now - because - his presidency might - might - have stirred the democratic party into opposing the wars.
As it is now, Obama is continuing Bush's policies with no opposition. The republicans are happy because they are Bush policies and good for business. The democrats are OK with it because it is a democratic president doing it, and it is good for business.
It is possible that if the discontent that is manifesting itself in the Wall Street protests continues to spread and grow in intensity that Obama might find himself in a situation similar to Humphrey in 1968. I hope so.
I can see a circumstance in which we wind up with a republican because of the complete disintegration of the democratic party with respect to any principles it once held dear.
In brief: The fact that the republican opposition is peopled with borderline maniacs and nutjobs may not be enough to save Obama.
I personally don't care.

Whhhhaaaaaaaaaaattttttttttt! (5.00 / 1) (#8)
by Jackson Hunter on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 05:50:45 AM EST

Don't tell me that Lucy pulled the football away again? But she promised me she wouldn't! (This isn't a shot at you Jeralyn, you've been tough on Obama for the most part.)

Personally though, I'm sick of that lying piece of garbage. At this point, we have to flush it all and start fresh. Seriously, what a freaking coward of a man, letting a bunch of people beneath him boss him around. I'd spit on the man's face if I could, but it would be a waste of good spit.

Sorry, I'm just tired, so tired of the hypocrisy and deception. If you need to edit this or delete, I'll understand Jeralyn.

Jackson

"Tough on him" (5.00 / 1) (#16)
by DancingOpossum on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 12:44:50 PM EST

Except for the part where she says we still have to vote for him.


and what progressive, democratic (none / 0) (#10)
by cpinva on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 06:53:24 AM EST

stalwart do you have in mind to replace him with? hey, the rest of the class wants to know!


Irrelevant (5.00 / 0) (#15)
by Romberry on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 10:50:24 AM EST

The point is to oppose those who actively work against us, regardless of what party label they wear. The opposition will give rise to the replacement. You're effectively putting the cart before the horse in demanding a fully crafted answer to a question that is not ready to be asked.


: If you start the search (none / 0) (#22)
by NYShooter on Sun Oct 09, 2011 at 12:34:01 AM EST

by eliminating anyone in elective office now the hunt becomes easier.
You could begin with those in show business. Name recognition would be a big plus. My list of candidates could start with:
Alec Baldwin
George Clooney
Sean Penn
Matt Damon
Then you could go on to sports figures; they've had sucess with elective office.Then economists, certain business people (not all are blood sucking scum)
The most important feature remains....No politicians!

Wink (none / 0) (#19)
by Lora on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 03:24:29 PM EST

If only Obama would run as a moderate Republican, which is how he behaves, then perhaps we would see a decent Democratic candidate emerge!


Well the (5.00 / 2) (#11)
by Ga6thDem on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 07:40:33 AM EST

video is of "Campaign Obama" and we all know by now that "Campaign Obama" goes around and tells every group what they want to hear. "Governing Obama" does what he wants and apparently considers those who actually bought into "Campaign Obama" to be a bunch of idiots.

: Yeah but... (none / 0) (#18)
by DancingOpossum on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 12:54:18 PM EST

People who believed what Campaign Obama said deserve what they got imo. Anyone who was paying attention (and MANY of Obama's supporters consider themselves highly educated and knowledgeable--indeed, insufferably so--"creative class," anyone?) knew from DAY ONE that Obama was at best a moderate Rep in Dem clothing, and a lying weasel and hippy-basher from way back. That he has proven to be far, far worse than even that -- well, that is actually even more shocking.

Bankers broke no laws, found loopholes (5.00 / 1) (#12)
by BobTinKY on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 07:59:12 AM EST

said Obama yesterday. That must have been his conclusion after reviewing his Administration's rigorous investigation of Wall Street.

Then 2 weeks ago claiming Americans would never accept European work week and vacations, "they want the money." No, Mr. Presdient, they need the money & that is the only way to get it thanks to our Galtian overlords.

I don't care who runs against him, I can never vote for this guy again.

It occurs to me that you could (5.00 / 1) (#13)
by Anne on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 08:24:04 AM EST

easily do a series titled, "Obama Then v. Obama Now," and have enough material to last a long, long time.

Were you to do that, I think it would become clear that, while it may be true that he is "still" better than the GOP alternative, that has become a distinction without much of a difference.

Not a happy camper here. (5.00 / 1) (#14)
by kindness on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 09:33:04 AM EST

I know I shouldn't approach any one issue as a deciding factor in supporting a politician. I know not supporting Obama in the 2012 election will be equivalent to biting off my nose to spite my face.

But....this is one issue that could cause me to 'break the camels back'.

Throughout this Administration we've seen compromises so that the policies enacted were half measures at best in order to placate the opposition. A Stimulus Bill that was way too small, throwing Single Payer overboard immediately, budget/debt debates using Republican talking points and then being surprised that the framing of the issue completely ignores a more progressive result.

This Administration has gone after it's own liberal base more than it has it's Republican opponents. Yea, they are trying to be 'adults'. They are trying to appease 'independents'. I can't understand that they don't see these 'independents' aren't independents at all. They are Republicans who for what ever reasons don't want to call themselves Republicans. These folk will NEVER vote for Obama. Never. So once again we have an issue where a Democratic Administration is going after their own base to be 'adults'.

Will this killing Medical Marijuana by Obama's DOJ get those 'Independent' voters to vote for him in 2012? No, not only will it not get their votes but I can promise you it will lose mine, and my face be damned.

Another broken campaign promise N/T (none / 0) (#1)
by athyrio on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 06:02:15 PM EST

Ch-ch-ch-changes (none / 0) (#4)
by Edger on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 09:29:21 PM EST

you can believe in.

You mean (5.00 / 2) (#5)
by the capstan on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 10:01:24 PM EST

cha-ching, don't you?


: And people wonder (none / 0) (#6)
by Edger on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 10:23:26 PM EST

why he grins like that all the time? ;-)

The entire administration (none / 0) (#7)
by dead dancer on Thu Oct 06, 2011 at 10:24:42 PM EST

has been one disappointment after another. There were a couple of hooray moments; like when: or when: or ... Well i'm sure there was something.

I've often wondered (none / 0) (#17)
by DancingOpossum on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 12:50:11 PM EST

Often wondered where the line would be drawn for dissatisfied Dems. Just how bad would Obama have to get before they pulled off the blinders? The expansion of Bush's worst policies didn't do it, Depression-era joblessness didn't do it, massive grand-scale slaughter overseas isn't doing it, FISA didn't do it, the Awlaki assassination, selling women down the river--nope, nada, zilch. Dems are still hanging in there because the magic "D" by his name cancels all ills and washes away all sins!

But this now -- this may do it. Not saying that's good or bad, just curious why this appears to be the tipping point for many.

: Dude... (none / 0) (#21)
by kdog on Fri Oct 07, 2011 at 05:18:59 PM EST

my tipping point was the Clinton Years, I'm just glad people are catching up:)

Time to Hijack the Tea Party (none / 0) (#23)
by BillMeltzer on Sun Oct 09, 2011 at 10:59:21 PM EST

The Marijuana Tea Party, Tens of Millions of P.O people who vote. We will vote for anyone who pledges on the first day in office to vote for Marijuana legalization. No one we elect could do worse than anyone now serving, except the likes of Mr. Sanders. Ending this craziness that criminalizes the HONEST HARD WORKING has got to end !!!