Wow - the press really kind of bird-dogged him on this. (If only they would have been this questioning with Bush and Iraq policy...)

Oh, and the answer to "Why?" was predictably lame.

Ha, Pot is so funny... giggle giggle.

^vaporlock
My thoughts exactly, why the fuck is this question so funny?

One thing that I have seen Obama do with this issue is to say that they will only prosecute drug offenses where the person violates both federal law and state law.

I know he doesn't want his name associated with any push to legalize weed, so maybe he is instead moving toward giving states the ability to control it themselves. That would allow certain states to be the example on what works and what doesn't. It would also let people get accustomed to the idea over time, making it a more natural transition.

That's what I'm hoping though. The change in prosecution practice doesn't seem to indicate that he is completely against legalization. I'd love to see the states gaining the ability to regulate what goes on in their own territory, but I'd also like to see it in the law so the next president can't just come along and reverse the whole thing.

"The president opposes the legalization of marijuana."

Doesn't get much clearer than that.

And I agree with the above: I saw nothing funny about this at all, and I found the laughter genuinely insulting.

>> ^rougy:
"The president opposes the legalization of marijuana."
Doesn't get much clearer than that.


Well, they've announced that they won't target users and distributors who are operating under state law, so that is at least a decent sign.

The real test will be Obama's response if a state like California completely legalizes weed for recreational use and everything. He could choose to maintain the hands-off approach to weed's legal status in that state despite his "opposition" to legalizing marijuana. Then again, he might say "nope, you can't do that" and target those dispensing to people without prescriptions even if it is legal there.

Personally, I hope it's a situation he has to deal with soon.

I guess next time we should read the party's platform before voting. I don't believe it mentions anything about drug legalization on the democrats.org website: http://www.democrats.org/a/party/platform.html

It does on the Libertarian Party site, however: http://www.lp.org/platform

>> ^blankfist:
I guess next time we should read the party's platform before voting. I don't believe it mentions anything about drug legalization on the democrats.org website: http://www.democrats.org/a/party/platform.html
It does on the Libertarian Party site, however: http://www.lp.org/platform


Yea, it's a shame Ron Paul lost by such a small margin. =)

I'd love for the Repubs to put him up against Obama in 2012, though I doubt he would get enough votes from the social conservatives.

*discard

Discarding this post - discard requested by original submitter qruel.