Penn To Obama on Marijuana "he would not be president under his policies"

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
he put out the holder memo instructing AGs to make it low priority.

the result? a flood of dispensaries. thousands opened up. unprecedented progress like we've never seen before.

have certain state AGs ignored the holder memo and prioritized MMJ higher? yep. they sure did and they can. what can you do? vote them the fuck out, just like we did up here in oregon. we just voted in rosenblum, who has the same position: make MMJ a low priority.

sorry bud, federally, MMJ laws don't exist. you can't just ignore congressionally passed federal laws.
 

billybob420

Well-Known Member
One thing he is right about is it's a class thing. Not just marijane laws, but all the laws. It's fuckin class warfare out there fellas! Put down the bong down and strap your boots on.
 

billybob420

Well-Known Member
Does the government have more to gain, by legalizing and taxing marijuana or does it have more to gain by keeping it illegal, destabilization our neighboring countries to the south with drug wars, propping up the prison industrial system (which is a far bigger business than they would ever get from taxes via legalization).

They have very little to gain from making it legal, the revenue from any taxes collected from legalization, in comparison to revenues they get from keeping it illegal, is very very small. While keeping it illegal, they have much more to gain.

And that's without implying it's the CIA that is controlling most of the drug flow and propping up these gangs down south. Which, I'm not saying that's the case, but I wouldn't be surprised if it were, and if it were the case, well, it's not gonna be legal anytime soon on a federal level (fuck the feds).

EDIT: Didn't mean to get all conspiracy theory sounding on that one..... I just don't put anything past the government. I just don't trust 'em.
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
I think the government should just put out a bulletin that they are sorry for bothering people for so long over a damn plant sorry for the inconvenience...we will now use all the money we have freed up by stopping chasing a natural phenomenon and jailing people, to create a healthcare and public school system that isn't a joke....sorry for the war on drugs continue your lives
How is it, after all the evidence that the government is NOT working properly, do we still expect them to do the right thing?
 

Mr Neutron

Well-Known Member
does anyone think children should smoke weed ??? What age should you start to smoke the plant???
One only needs to read some of the posts on this site to know the answer to that question. I would suggest that it should be the same as alcohol, 18, unless it is used with parental supervision.
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
he put out the holder memo instructing AGs to make it low priority.

the result? a flood of dispensaries. thousands opened up. unprecedented progress like we've never seen before.

have certain state AGs ignored the holder memo and prioritized MMJ higher? yep. they sure did and they can. what can you do? vote them the fuck out, just like we did up here in oregon. we just voted in rosenblum, who has the same position: make MMJ a low priority.

sorry bud, federally, MMJ laws don't exist. you can't just ignore congressionally passed federal laws.
as usual UB has it all twisted. Holder hasnt gone on rrecord with any memo from his own hand. THERE IS NO "HOLDER MEMO" on this subject.

Obama promised to NOT fuck with states who decided to allow Medical Cannabis Access.

Obama instructed the DOJ thusly, within his discretionary power as cheif executive.

Deputy Attorney General Ogden sent out a memo that instructed the DOJ to not "focus" on operations which were within guidelines of individual state's laws. (http://www.justice.gov/opa/documents/medical-marijuana.pdf)

Deputy Attorney General Cole then shouted "FUCK YOU Obama and Ogden!!" in his memo (http://www.mpp.org/assets/pdfs/library/Cole-memo.pdf) and declared that state laws are meaningless when placed in opposition to federal regulations

Various Deputy Attorney Generals (deliberately NOT attorneys general, as thats retarded) then started firing off threatening letters to state officials in MMJ states,l and those considering MMJ laws threatening them with prosecution for "facilitating" traffic in controlled substances

Attorney General Eric "Fast n Furious" Holder then simply smiled and watched his minions rip and tear at the various state laws (califonia in particular) to find a weakness.

California for example never implemented the legislative mandates from prop 215 (sb 420 is a fucking mess, and is useless as law) and has never created the state registry required to make us compliant with prop 215, so under state law we are all non-compliant, from the farms to the clinics to individual patients, and thus all vulnerable to getting busted for a single doobie in our house.

I know Uncle Buck will trot out his doggerel about feds only busting those who arent "fully compliant with state law", but since full compliance is impossible in california, he will only be pissing on his own shoes.

Meanwhile, Obama hasnt stopped holder's antics, on cannabis or gun smuggling into mexico. since obama can fire holder at will, he must therefore approve of what holder is doing.

Obama is using Holder to enhance his tough on crime stance for re-election, while pointing to the ogden memo to show he's the pothead president. Obama is a liar and a douche.
 

londonfog

Well-Known Member
One only needs to read some of the posts on this site to know the answer to that question. I would suggest that it should be the same as alcohol, 18, unless it is used with parental supervision.
you do know the law for alcohol in the USA is 21 not 18...so you want it to be allowed at 18 ??? You also insinuate that with parental supervision that it could be smoked at the age of 10... is this correct ???
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I know Uncle Buck will trot out his doggerel about feds only busting those who arent "fully compliant with state law", but since full compliance is impossible in california, he will only be pissing on his own shoes.
just letting you do the work for me. thanks.

Obama is using Holder to enhance his tough on crime stance for re-election, while pointing to the ogden memo to show he's the pothead president.
it's almost as if the guy were a politician or something, eh?

let's all vote for romney instead then. mitt romney is bringing sexy back!
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
you do know the law for alcohol in the USA is 21 not 18...so you want it to be allowed at 18 ??? You also insinuate that with parental supervision that it could be smoked at the age of 10... is this correct ???
There is no federal law regarding what age one must be to drink booze.

each state makes it's own laws about minimum ages for sales service consumption and manufacture of alcoholic beverages.

federal regulations simply cut off funding from many federal sources for states that decline to accept the federal government's opinion on the subject.

Interestingly enough, parents may at their discretion serve booze to their kids at whatever age the parents decide is appropriate, but it is illegal to let kids get drunk. drunk however is un-defined, except when operating a motor vehicle. motor vehicle operation is also "illegal" for those under 16, unless their parents permit it. I learned to drive a pickup truck at age 9 I was driving tractors and combines by the time i was ten. at 12 i was parking 18 wheelers for my uncles, and running forklifts.

even gun ownership has a minimum age that can be overridden by parents. you must be 21 to purchase a handgun, or 18 for other firearms in california, but you can own a pistol at age 8 (like i did) if your parents allow it. heck you can even get deer huntin licenses at age 10.
 

Canna Sylvan

Well-Known Member
let's all vote for romney instead then. mitt romney is bringing sexy back!
False Dilemma


whenever you are presented with two possibilities, it is crucial to establish whether those possibilities are contradictions, contraries, or choices. Presenting two options as if they were contradictions or contraries, when in fact they are not, is the common fallacy of false dilemma--so called because the "dilemma," or hard choice between two options, is "false," because other options than the two offered are possible. This fallacy is also known as the "either-or fallacy" because it makes you think that your options are limited to either one or the other.

http://www.sjsu.edu/depts/itl/graphics/adhom/dilemma.html
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
just letting you do the work for me. thanks.



it's almost as if the guy were a politician or something, eh?

let's all vote for romney instead then. mitt romney is bringing sexy back!
Thats a specious argument. Obama is a useless lying twat, that doesnt mean mister monopoly romney is good. both are garbage. you cant defend a pile of trash by pointing out that his opponent is a garbage heap. both are unworthy, and a stain on this nation. we need Theodore Roosevelt now, not a choice between Herbert Hoover and Woodrow Wilson.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
Thats a specious argument. Obama is a useless lying twat, that doesnt mean mister monopoly romney is good. both are garbage. you cant defend a pile of trash by pointing out that his opponent is a garbage heap. both are unworthy, and a stain on this nation. we need Theodore Roosevelt now, not a choice between Herbert Hoover and Woodrow Wilson.
i agree. a hardcore progressive like teddy would do us good.

in any case, one of the two is inevitable. which option do you prefer?
 

Dr Kynes

Well-Known Member
UncleBuck has been getting pwned pretty hard lately, it almost makes me feel bad. almost bongsmilie
It's not about anybody gettin pwned, it's about reasoned debate among intelligent and (sorta) sober adults regarding the most important duty we have as citizens. When we elect a representative he speaks for us, and acts on our behalf. if that dude is a dickhead (like Obama) and lies about everything he does, while blaming all his retarded actions on the last guy, then we have to either reject or accept this behavior in the next election. Romney sucks donkey dicks, but voting for Obama puts your PERSONAL stamp of approval on his actions. Better to choose the guy who hast betrayed your trust then the asshole who already put granny in gitmo for smokin her glaucoma medicine.

Uncle Buck often gets "pwned" but its usually because he doesnt respond to the reasoned arguments of others, instead he distracts, changes the subject, and indulges in just about every rhetorical fallacy known to man. This results in rather hilarious diatribes about non-sequitors when the subject at hand is whether Obama has fulfilled his campaign promises (he hasnt) or even whether Uncle Buck's fictitious "Holder Memo" even exists. Logic and reason always look like Ultimate Win when placed in opposition to the Obvious Fail of "when did you stop beating your wife?", or my favorite presidential debate trick "Your sister is a practicing Thespian!".
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
It's not about anybody gettin pwned, it's about reasoned debate among intelligent and (sorta) sober adults regarding the most important duty we have as citizens. When we elect a representative he speaks for us, and acts on our behalf. if that dude is a dickhead (like Obama) and lies about everything he does, while blaming all his retarded actions on the last guy, then we have to either reject or accept this behavior in the next election. Romney sucks donkey dicks, but voting for Obama puts your PERSONAL stamp of approval on his actions. Better to choose the guy who hast betrayed your trust then the asshole who already put granny in gitmo for smokin her glaucoma medicine.

Uncle Buck often gets "pwned" but its usually because he doesnt respond to the reasoned arguments of others, instead he distracts, changes the subject, and indulges in just about every rhetorical fallacy known to man. This results in rather hilarious diatribes about non-sequitors when the subject at hand is whether Obama has fulfilled his campaign promises (he hasnt) or even whether Uncle Buck's fictitious "Holder Memo" even exists. Logic and reason always look like Ultimate Win when placed in opposition to the Obvious Fail of "when did you stop beating your wife?", or my favorite presidential debate trick "Your sister is a practicing Thespian!".
so, either romney or obama is going to be sitting in the office come late january 2013. who would you prefer?
 

blindbaby

Active Member
He's right, while Obama goes around on late night talk shows almost bragging about his use of drugs in his younger days, thousands of other people are sitting in jail or prison under the laws Obama now supports, what a friggin hypocrite.

But I'm sure some of the loyal lefties on here will try to spin this any way they can for Obama damage control.
i wont vote for anyone on one issue. but ill vote against our current pres, on any issue. the right is more against pot. so what. more things important than weed. hell, ill allways manage to have it. no matter what the law. get rid of this "entitlement mentality" that they are teaching our youth, would be the most important thing right now. the gov has but one job, (origianlly). to protect us from enemies, foreighn and domestic. thats it. the left preaches tollerance. but shows NONE. and class warfare is for the lazy. anyone ever had a poor person offer them a job?? neither have i. but, its understandable why they are against business, since they have no desire, or plan, to work anyway....
 
Top