Rumors about Mr. Barak Obama.

Sherlock0824

Sherlock0824

New Member
So recently, i heard that Presidental Candidate Barak Obama is PRO-Legalization, and was just wondering, is it true, or just a random e-rumor?
 
Dats

Dats

Well-Known Member
US Senator Barack Obama: Obama's issue page contains nothing about drug policy. He has admitted to using marijuana and cocaine as a youth, but does not support decriminalization of marijuana. In recent months, Obama has criticized racial disparities in the criminal justice system, saying he would review mandatory minimum sentencing, the crack-powder cocaine sentencing disparity, and seek rehabilitation instead of imprisonment for first-time drug offenders. Last summer, he said he supports lifting the federal ban on funding for needle exchanges.
 
bongspit

bongspit

New Member
it doesn't really matter one way or another whether[SIZE=+0] a presidential candidate is for or against legalization of marijuana. if elected he can not just say " ok pot is legal"...the next president will have so much shit to deal with I seriously doubt that marijuana will be much of a consideration...[/SIZE]
 
goatamineHcL

goatamineHcL

Well-Known Member
it doesnt matter hillary is gonna win she was at the last bilderburger convention for half of the thing she has already been "picked"
 
O

Oisterboy

Well-Known Member
Not to sound racist or anything, quite the contrary...

but, should he win the election, I'm sure the LAST thing he'd want was

"the first black man in the white house legalized marijuana"...


Something to think about, to say the least.
 
bongspit

bongspit

New Member
Oisterboy said:
Not to sound racist or anything, quite the contrary...

but, should he win the election, I'm sure the LAST thing he'd want was

"the first black man in the white house legalized marijuana"...


Something to think about, to say the least.
Click to expand...
that's what I'm talking about...
 
mrskitz

mrskitz

Well-Known Member
well someones gota do it,and i dont care if that persons black or white.
why does race always get brought into shit,,,,its about what a person can do,not what race a person is,,,,,,
 
Erniedytn

Erniedytn

Master of Mayhem
bongspit said:
it doesn't really matter one way or another whether[SIZE=+0] a presidential candidate is for or against legalization of marijuana. if elected he can not just say " ok pot is legal"...the next president will have so much shit to deal with I seriously doubt that marijuana will be much of a consideration...[/SIZE]
Click to expand...
Doesn't the "checks and balances" system prevent that? I mean if that were true the president would be more of a king right? Bills have to be approved by the senate, congress, and the president before they can become a law.
 
goatamineHcL

goatamineHcL

Well-Known Member
Erniedytn said:
Doesn't the "checks and balances" system prevent that? I mean if that were true the president would be more of a king right? Bills have to be approved by the senate, congress, and the president before they can become a law.
Click to expand...

thats how its "supposed " to work:roll:
 
bongspit

bongspit

New Member
Erniedytn said:
Doesn't the "checks and balances" system prevent that? I mean if that were true the president would be more of a king right? Bills have to be approved by the senate, congress, and the president before they can become a law.
Click to expand...
prevent what???
 
goatamineHcL

goatamineHcL

Well-Known Member
but i think he would have the poower to come in and just cut fundiong to whateveragency he wanted like cut dea funding or funding for war on drugs but i dont think he would do that it would piss off too many people
 
Erniedytn

Erniedytn

Master of Mayhem
bongspit said:
prevent what???
Click to expand...
It prevents the president from making whatever the hell he wants into a law. The three divisions of the government have a "checks and balances" system. If congress decides that they want to pass a bill, they then have to have approval frpom the senate and the president. If the president wants to make a law he has to have approval from congress and the senate.

Separation of powers, a term coined by French political Enlightenment thinker Baron de Montesquieu[1][2], is a model for the governance of democratic states. The model is also known as Trias Politica.
The model was first developed by the ancient greeks in the constitutions that governed their city-states. However, it first came into widespread use by the Roman Republic. It was outlined in the Constitution of the Roman Republic.
Under this model, the state is divided into branches or estates, and each estate of the state has separate and independent powers and areas of responsibility. The normal division of estates is into the Executive, the Legislative, and the Judicial.
Proponents of separation of powers believe that it protects democracy and forestalls tyranny; opponents of separation of powers, such as Professor Charles M. Hardin,[3] have pointed out that, regardless of whether it accomplishes this end, it also slows down the process of governing, promotes executive dictatorship and unaccountability, and tends to marginalize the legislature.
No democratic system exists with an absolute separation of powers or an absolute lack of separation of powers. Nonetheless, some systems are clearly founded on the principle of separation of powers, while others are clearly based on a mingling of powers.
Click to expand...
Separation of powers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
bongspit

bongspit

New Member
Erniedytn said:
It prevents the president from making whatever the hell he wants into a law. The three divisions of the government have a "checks and balances" system. If congress decides that they want to pass a bill, they then have to have approval frpom the senate and the president. If the president wants to make a law he has to have approval from congress and the senate.



Separation of powers - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Click to expand...
I agree...
 
lunasea

lunasea

Active Member
goatamineHcL said:
but i think he would have the poower to come in and just cut fundiong to whateveragency he wanted like cut dea funding or funding for war on drugs but i dont think he would do that it would piss off too many people
Click to expand...
Congress is in charge of appropriations; the power of the purse is one of its fundamental powers. But you're right, the President cannot wantonly enact laws or change legislative precedence. Nonetheless, Barack Obama has stated that if a medical marijuana bill reaches his desk, he would sign it. Keep in mind, this isn't legalization or even decriminalization but it is a step in the right direction. Issues are only issues because of popular attention and popular outcry. There's no reason marijuana can't and shouldn't be a major issue.
 
R

rkm

Well-Known Member
Of the top fore runners now, which if any are the step in the right direction? I know Ron Paul is the best candidate, but come on, realistically speaking he does not look like he will make it much longer. But out of Obama, Clinton and the others that are on top, which one has the best perception of MJ without the prejudices?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top