The Obama Administration has put down in writing their official policy on medical marijuana. They will no longer interfere with state medical marijuana laws. The most important benefit of this policy is that it opens the door for states to implement much more robust systems of production and distribution without interference from the DEA. Previously, states faced a dilemma in that the more regulation of a medical marijuana system that they created, the more paper trails there were for the DEA to take the whole thing down. That’s a big reason why California’s system ended up being such an unregulated mess. With this new policy, it will be easier for states to set it up the right way.
All of this may soon become moot because the tide is quickly turning towards allowing regulated sales to recreational users as well.
There isn’t a state-by-state breakdown, but this poll shows the same result seen in previous polls, that a majority of people on the west coast support full legalization. Of course, as we’ve learned with the public option, you need about 70-75% support for something before Democrats find the testicular fortitude to implement it.
[Y]ou need about 70-75% support for something before Democrats find the testicular fortitude to implement it.
Amen to that.
As a point of interest, do you think that the Republicans forcibly castrated Harry Reid or did he give them up voluntarily? Just curious.
Not a fan of pot but if the market demands found a way to give southerners a method for using hemp as a viable farm product then those numbers will be reversed.
@1
As a point of interest, do you think that the Republicans forcibly castrated Harry Reid or did he give them up voluntarily?
They’re sitting in a jar in the boardroom of Blue Cross.
when you say “testicular fortitude” does that mean you don’t have the balls to say “balls”?
[Deleted — see HA Comment Policy]
They’re sitting in a jar in the boardroom of Blue Cross.
Thanks for revealing the location of Old Harry’s testicular fortitudes. Maybe I can stop by Blue Cross and see if they were ever big enough to do the job. Do you have a magnifying glass that I can borrow?
And once the legislature finally passes the law, a citizen’s initiative will come and have the law overturned.
The fascinating frontier of all this may be in the board rooms and labs of Big Tobacco.
Imagine that we finally do legalize MJ as a product.
What are the natural sequelae?
1. Lobbying by Big Tobacco to to regulate sale and production.
2. Lobbying by taxation folks .. INCLUDING THE WINGNUTS!!! … to make this a luxury tax.
3. Lobbying by the Am Cancer Society to limit sales the smoked form. Hell THC is a lot cheaper to produce and is easily included in “heart healthy foods” like cookies and diet drinks.
4. Innovation by Big Tobacco and Big Agra to create a full line of Marijuana products:
Of course, profit, cost and regulation will drive the market to RJ Reynolds, Proctor and Gamble, and Kraft. These good folks wil make cheap TNC from corn (Cargill*)
Lee’s community will naturally fight to keep their “natural” product on the market, but they will lose most of the market. Even Starbucks will want environmentally friendly Missippi Bud.
ALL of this leads to the final question..can America dominate this new industry? Is there a Marlboro Man, Ronald McDonald, or or Michael Jackson in the future of the American Marketing of Pot?
It may be fun for Lee and other to think about applying NOW for this job. But I don’t expect that MJ-man will be in the hippy mold. Imagine instead, something based on a software type, manly yet urban.
Imagine the female market driven by a sophisticated, full lipped model … is this an opening for Whitney to return? Perhaps it would make more sense for MJ man to be Puerto Rican? Shouldn’t there be a curvaceous Mary Jane as well?
The ad:
MJ man and Maria Jane, standing on a doc, the pulling a drag as the sun rises over San Juan, Puerto Rico!
Children, a boy and a girl, as well as a golden retriever run up the hill to join them. The family walks down to the beach, still smoking, they jump into their sail boat. Mom hands the picnic basket to MJ man. .. Laughter and sounds of contented munching as Cargill’s logo rises from the sea.
* This post sponsored by Cargill MJ ltd. *
*Cargill, Incorporated is a privately held, multinational corporation, and is
based in the state of Minnesota in the United States. It was founded in 1865, and currenlty adulterates virtually everything we eat.
Silly potheads, drugs are for fuckups.
Potheads would cheer except there too wasted. I am proud of the fact that I’ve never done demon pot.
“Potheads would cheer except there too wasted. I am proud of the fact that I’ve never done demon pot.”
… and yet, we know how to spell “they’re.” Funny.
More and more these days, we’re finding that it’s the productive, smart leaders who occasionally enjoy a toke (see recent articles in Elle and Marie Claire, for example), while the “drug-free” drug war cheerleaders are increasingly populated by Wal-Mart greeters, beer-drinking frat boys, and others who can’t find their way around the basics of the English language.
Go ahead, be proud. I would not deny you that small boon to your self-esteem.
O.K. I you caught me. I made an error in my spelling. I usuially grt that one right. However, I take the King James Version Bible over Elle and Marie Claire. That tells me to stay sober. No drugs, beer, wine or liquor. I just don’t get it.
I almost forgot. Self-Esteem is not important.
Are you saying Jesus didn’t drink wine in the King James Version?
If you really read your Bible, you’ll find that it’s excess that is frowned upon, not use. And that it should be personal moral responsibility, not the state, that controls it.
I find it (not so) amazing that those who invariably brand themselves as being ‘conservative’ – and who claim to have a traditional conservative’s dislike of governmental intrusion into their lives – are usually cheerleaders for the War on Drugs.
A famous science-fiction writer, Robert Heinlein, once wrote that:
Political tags–such as royalist, communist, democrat, populist, fascist, liberal, conservative, and. so forth–are never basic criteria. The human race divides politically into those who want people to be controlled and those who have no such desire. The former are idealists acting from highest motives for the greatest good of the greatest number. The latter are surly curmudgeons, suspicious and lacking in altruism. But they are more comfortable neighbors than the other sort.
i’d rather have such ‘comfortable neighbors’ than those who are Hell-bent on killing me to ‘save’ me from something that can’t possibly threaten me as much as my would-be saviors do.
So…who’re the real conservatives in America? The ones who want to preserve traditional rights? (Such as the one Justice Brandeis mentioned, the one about being ‘let alone’ by government busybodies.) Or the faux conservatives who think the Constitution is a Chinese menu that you can pick out and discard what you don’t like? And use their prejudices and ignorance to guide that choice?
Jefferson warned us not to monkey with the Constitution, for it was the only bulwark against home grown tyranny. But with the so-called ‘drug exception’ to the Bill of Rights, we have that tyranny in the form of overbearing drug police dressed up as Darth Vader and killing innocent people with impunity. It was the DrugWar with those ‘drug exceptions’ that provided the legal framework for the so-called ‘PATRIOT Act’ and other such abominations that hurt US citizens more than any turbaned goat-herder ever could.
So, when will the real conservatives stand up and say “Enough’s enough! Stop this stupid s**t, quit trampling on my rights while trying to ‘save’ me, and use the money spent on on the DrugWar for better things!” That’s the real litmus test of conservatism…
Change Puddy can believe in. No drug prosecutions. Do what you wanna do as an adult. God gives you free choice. But for Puddy, No Drugs. No drinking. Getting rid of the bizarro CZARS is a priority!
Hey SeattleJew… about Jesus and wine
Doesn’t the Talmud in Sotah 48a and Mishnah Sotah 9:11 indicate drinking was forbidden at festive occasions such as weddings when musical instruments were played? You can’t sing in bars etc because alcohol is served? So how could Jesus break the Jewish law and make alcoholic wine as people think in John 2:10? Oinos is misconstrued for fermented wine? Wouldn’t that be cause for blasphemy?
@13
I almost forgot. Self-Esteem is not important.
Speak for yourself, “Renndawg”
LOL!
Pass the hat around stoner Lee, your pals need bail.
http://www.bellinghamherald.co.....23848.html
Aren’t those your folks, Mark1? After all, the only reason they were in business is because of prohibition.
The drug dealers don’t want legalization and regulation — they live off bad policy (that I assume you support) that puts drug distribution in the hands of criminals. And any that are arrested are immediately replaced, because that’s how the laws of black market economics work.
Lee, I’d rather have humulity than self-esteem. Self-esteem lead to the first act of rebellion against God.
Oh by the way. Wine is a general term. Grape juice was called wine then. It is when the wine is fermented that causes problems. I believe Jesus drank new wine.
Also how can some one do pot and not get intoxicated. Intoxication is a sin forbidden by God’s Word.