I’m a little late in commenting on this, but I’m going to risk being called naive and say that I believe this is 100% true:
U.S. attorneys have a message for California’s medical marijuana advocates: Don’t blame Barack Obama. After it was announced that the crackdown on medical pot establishments in the Golden State was a collective decision by the four U.S. attorneys in California and not the result of any directive from Washington, spokeswoman Lauren Horwood emphasized that the administration never even green-lighted the ramped-up enforcement actions.
The only D.C.-based official with whom California U.S. attorneys coordinated, Horwood said, was Deputy Attorney General James Cole, who was chosen by Attorney General Eric Holder, an Obama appointee.
“He’s the one who provided the quote for our press release, and he’s chosen by Eric Holder,” Horwood told HuffPost in an interview. “But we didn’t have direct talks with Eric Holder — not that we wouldn’t, he’s been out and visited — but just the way the Department of Justice works, he’s not that hands-on on these kinds of details.”
After the crackdown was announced, fingers were immediately pointed at Obama. The Young Turks saw this as Obama doing the bidding of the pharmaceutical industry. I’ve heard others theorize that this is happening to prevent medical marijuana profits from funding legalization initiatives in 2012. But if this article is accurate, the reality seems to be far more mundane than that (and I suggested that possibility about a month ago).
Much of the overreaching federal drug law enforcement we see comes from the simple fact that law enforcement bureaucracies across the nation are still filled with people who’ve become ideologically wedded to the failed mentality of prohibition. They continue to see the use of marijuana (whether it’s recreational or medicinal) as a phenomenon driven by those who sell it, rather than by those who buy it. As long as they live in that up-is-down-black-is-white world – and the government still gives them the power to act on their insanity – they’re going to do things as spectacularly stupid as what they’re about to do in California.
This isn’t to say that Obama is off the hook. He’s still the President, and it’s very clear that his U.S. Attorneys are getting ready to make him into a gigantic liar over his promise not to interfere with state medical marijuana laws. Even if he wasn’t the originator of this boondoggle, he has the power to stop it. And a lot of folks on the west coast are going to remember how he handles this when next November rolls around.
Well, at least this president doesn’t fire U.S. attorneys for refusing to prosecute county election directors who didn’t do anything wrong. That’s worth something.
This crackdown has been going on for the better part of a month in California..and the threatening letters from the DOJ accompanied by raids in the other MM states much longer than that..
To suggest the US attorneys have gone rogue and Obama knew nothing about this and now can’t do anything to stop it, is the height of mindless blind partisanship..Yet I’ve been running into this argument on Democratic boards.
According to ASA, Obama has been worse than Bush on this issue, but apparently some don’t care or just don’t want to listen…because, for them, all that matters is protecting that precious “D” after the name…
Both major parties support the drug war. We very simply have no viable alternative..the fix is in, the persecution will continue. Isn’t the two party system great?
If Obama cared to keep his commitments about marijuana, and if these US Attorneys were off the reservation, then they should be in Holder’s office offering their resignations.
If you care about a policy, and your subordinates undermine your policy, you fire them. Period.
He is either complicit, or weak, or trying to project some cynical triangulation – in no way is he showing any leadership on this issue.
How’s that for blind partisanship?
Did anyone catch Barry McCaffrey on KUOW on Tuesday morning?
Horrible.
Talked about “doobies”
Said alcohol was the most destructive drug out there (correct, I think), but since we can’t put that back in the bag, we shouldn’t let anyone have access to any other drugs.
Fairly equated crystal meth with marijuana.
Said Marinol was perfectly equivalent or better than marijuana for medicinal purposes (wrong).
Suggested that tolerating recreational marijuana smoking would lead to a life of abject despair and misery of addiction.
It was “Reefer Madness” all over again. And this schmuck was the ‘Drug Czar’ and is a talking head on the TeeVee and the radio.
I personally smoked bales of the stuff back in college, and I have two doctoral degrees. My compatriots back in the day are now professors of physics and economics, nurses, lawyers, some people very high-up in the environmental establishment, successful business owners – no drop outs or casualties in the mix.
Rather than creating prohibitions, and obligate organized crime, we as a society need to identify those people whose brain chemistry leads to hyper-dopaminergic responses to intoxication, and leads to addiction, and guide them away from danger – though I suspect that they are a tiny minority. Perhaps more importantly, we need to give those people who are ‘escaping’ with drugs – from poverty, from abuse, from abject hopelessness – something to live for. I strongly suspect that ‘drug abuse’ is mostly a symptom, not a cause, of a society that is comfortable with ‘throw-away’ people. We need more connection with each other, we all need to participate and prosper, we need healthy community – and prohibition is a band-aid, again, instituted by those unafflicted, and intended to make the underclass a bit more palatable.
@3
He is either complicit, or weak, or trying to project some cynical triangulation – in no way is he showing any leadership on this issue.
I think he’s weak, and I think he has people advising him not to interfere with what his DOJ is doing.
@2
To suggest the US attorneys have gone rogue and Obama knew nothing about this and now can’t do anything to stop it
To be clear, I certainly don’t believe the latter part of that sentence. Obama can (and should) stop what his U.S. Attorneys are doing.
I think the President is choosing his battles carefully right now. Right now he knows that if he doesn’t get re-elected in 2012, bad things will happen:
(a) We will return to the Bush-era policy of letting banks and industry pretty much do whatever they want, whatever the consequences to the rest of us;
(b) Tax cuts will remove what little remaining safety net is in place;
(c) The little Health Care Reforms he was able to enact will be trashed;
(d) The House will push hard to loot (err, “privatize) the Social Security Trust Fund;
etc., etc., etc.
Just like the George W. Bush administration was far worse than the Reagan administration, any Republican taking office owing a big debt to the Tea Party for support in the primaries will be far worse than the Bush administration.
So I can’t blame him for not wanting to get into a debate over pot legalization on top of everything else in the upcoming campaign.
Continuation of # 7:
Remember if the President isn’t re-elected, the Republican candidate will select the next one or two Supreme Court justices, turning a current 4-4-1 court into a 6-2-1 court. You think Citizen’s United was a bad decision? Just wait for what what will happen with Clarence Thomas writing all the court’s decisions over the next fifteen years or so.
Yet another thread supporting full legalization of cannabis. It’s coming, albeit slowly. One day cannabis will be totally legal and a product regulated and taxed accordingly, just as we do with alcohol and tobacco.
It’s important to recognize that O never replaced most of the US Attys. Most of the Bush guys are still in place, including the ones that went along with the evil surrounding Ala Gov Siegelman — among many examples of perfidy in the US Atty scandal.
Also remember that the DOJ has been systematically burrowed to the max by xtrianist wingnuts from Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson’s “universities” who were carefully screened for being the wingnuttiest by Monica Goodling.
@2 “apparently some don’t care or just don’t want to listen…because, for them, all that matters is protecting that precious “D” after the name…
Yeah right, we’re just protecting the “D” after the name, we D’s never bash Obama on this board …
Seems that some, as you put it, “just don’t want to listen” — or read for that matter …
You have a point, though — it’s funny how all the U.S. attorneys in MM states “went rogue” at the same time …
# 10: And the reason most of them are still around is that the Republicans will put a “hold” on any replacement the President nominates – effectively vetoing the nominee by filibuster (without having to go through the difficult process of actuall filibustering).
@12 This bullshit of “virtual filibusters” needs to end! If Rethugs want to filibuster a nominee or bill, make them filibuster it, at 2 AM.
Where do you study? Forum Preteens Gallery
%(