You Voted for Obama?Gee, thanks

[samsong]

So much for Obama being soft on drugs:

http://www.reason.com/blog/show/130163.html

Here is the first part of the article:


Barack Obama's selection of Eric Holder as his attorney general is a very discouraging sign for anyone who hoped (http://www.reason.com/news/show/130034.html) the new administration would de-escalate the war on drugs. As Dave Weigel noted (http://www.reason.com/blog/show/130156.html) earlier today, Holder pushed for stiffer marijuana penalties when he was the U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, and the details are strikingly at odds not only with Obama's signals regarding marijuana but with his opposition to long sentences for nonviolent drug offenders. According to a December 1996 report in The Washington Times excerpted (http://www.talkleft.com/story/2008/11/18/21472/416) at TalkLeft, Holder wanted "minimum sentences of 18 months for first-time convicted drug dealers, 36 months for the second time and 72 months for every conviction thereafter." He also wanted to "make the penalty for distribution and possession with intent to distribute marijuana a felony, punishable with up to a five-year sentence." The D.C. Council made the latter Holder-endorsed change in 2000. Holder thought New York City's irrational, unjust crackdown (http://www.reason.com/news/show/126363.html) on pot smokers was a fine idea and worth emulating, saying "we have too long taken the view that what we would term to be minor crimes are not important." His rhetoric on the seriousness of marijuana offenses was indistinguishable from that of the most zealous Republican drug warrior:
The truth of the matter is that marijuana is a significant problem for the city....Crack cocaine still drives most of the violence in this city, but marijuana violence is increasing. We need to nip it in the bud.

[WarmCyanide]

I DID NOT VOTE FOR OBAMA.

[blutuesday]

I mean, what did people expect? Vote for obama and all of a sudden all of the laws would change? And that drugs would become legal?

This country we live in, will NEVER legalize drugs. This country we live in will never be as proactive as the U.K or Canada regarding drugs.

It was still better than voting for McCain.

Oh, and you are welcome! :)

[samsong]

I don't think anyone expected them to become legal, please, people aren't that fucking naive. But the expectation was that he would be softer on drugs and the Drug War than his predecessors. The pick of Eric Holder as Attorney General is a step in the wrong direction, and for that, people who voted for him based upon him easing the drug war, have been had. Eric Holder wants to go after "mairjuana violence", what a fool. So much for change.

[Papa Verine]

I voted for Ron Paul. A so-called "wasted vote".

Like yours actually counted...

[Ludakris]

Yes, as the years wear on, it does seem that voting for president is always going to be voting for the "lesser of two evils". No candidate will EVER get into office in this country who wants to legalize/regulate drugs because we've been pumped full of so much propaganda and bullshit that we (as a people) think that all of our problems spur from drug use and moral/church related issues (gay marriage, abortion, etc).

If everyone can just get it through their head and all think alike and give in to what the government insists is "right" than we can fix this country by golly!

*sigh* Keep the dream alive though, right? Funny thing is, if you would have asked someone 30 years ago: "what do you think will happen first? legalizing Marijuana? or being able to fit 20,000 8 tracks on a device the size of a credit card?" no doubt their answer would have been free pot before magical musical devices.

Ron Paul, 2012!

[WarmCyanide]

btw. Obama isn't president OP

[samsong]

I wrote in Ron Paul on a mail in ballot--not a wasted vote at all. I don't beleive in voting for the lesser of two evils as it is still an endordsemnt of evil. MCain certainly would have been bad on the drug policy if elected, but the only thing I thought Obama would do and why I did hope he would win over McCain, was to ease up the drug war which has become a war on on doctors and patients mroe than aything else

. The pick of Holder means doctors are still going to be just as gun shy as they were under Bush, and the jails will still be full of non-violent kids who didn't hurt anybody. Now, how is Obama "better" than McCain if his drug policy is going to be same? He continues to stab his supporters in the back with each pick he makes, juxst like Bush did to conservatives over the last 8 years. Democrat, Republican, there is no difference anymore, just who is more effective at pre-election pandering and lying. Once they get elected, they do whatever the fuck they want regardless of what their supporters want. Goverment for the People, By the People? What a joke.

The biggest myth is that it is your patritoic duty to vote for Presidnet, even if you don't agree with them-now how is it patritoic if I vote for someone who seeks to take away my rights? That's why it was not a wasted vote to write in Ron Paul, as he was the only candidate from the entire election cycle that gave two shits about individual rights.

[Duckfeet]

People who didn't vote for Ron Paul in the primaries, have no right to gripe...he was the *only* candidate who addressed this issue in an honest, persuasive way...those who didn't vote for Paul, then had to make other decisions, none of which affect us junkys...

I'm truly proud and grateful I voted for Obama...but my drug problems won't be affected a bit...who cares...we missed our chance...but during the republican primaries, I went to the trouble of changing my party affiliation from libertarian to republican, simply to vote for the one man who might save us all; I sent his campaign some money, and adjitated on here for him..so I hope all of you now complaining about Obama did the same...it wasn't like we weren't *talking* about in on here...and TP particularly--who is now gone, and occasionally bitched about, now he can't defend himself--put a lot of time and effort into trying to show his fellow opys that R Paul was our only hope...

Now, u might as well enjoy the ride...but it'll not get better for us...nor probably worse...just more of the same....

[MissyAggravation]

you're welcome.
my voting for him was not contingent upon his being "soft" on drugs. i voted for him because i'm counting on his promise of national health care and the hope that he'll find ways to reverse the current unemployment rate.
i have a serious illness that has rendered me uninsurable and my husband has been looking for work for 6 months now and i'm sorry but i can't get high anyway if i'm either dead or broke.
there are loads of issues in this country that need to be resolved, including the war on drugs and addicts, but at this stage in my life i feel as though i personally have fish that are bigger than my monkey to fry.

[Opiyum]

As if voting for Mccain would have been our salvation. I assume that is what you are getting at here.
I didn't vote for anyone because I don't consider a lesser of two evils a worthwhile choice to be made.
Besides. There are far more important issues to address right now. In my opinion it's selfish and irresponsible to base your vote on something as minor as drug policy.
You aren't going to be able to afford the indulgence of drugs if you lose your job due to massive layoffs because of a failing economy.
Oh and there's a war on too. Some would say that's worth considering.

[samsong]

Not at all, as I stated I didn't vote for MCain either--read my other posts to get the jist of where I am coming from. I'm acutally more concerned with the war on drugs, that specificlly targets millions of doctors and pain patients, and with the immoral, unconstitutional and racist crack cocaine laws that specifically target african americans. Obama appoints a black attorney general who wants to keep these laws, and keep more young black men in prison for non-violent selling and posession of crack--the laws are racist to the extreme and Obama appoints a black man to insure that it continues. If I were black, I would view that as a direct stab in the back.

I think Mcain would have been a miserable failure as president, but what I am getting at is that Obama seems to be breaking promise after promise with each appointee he is making, so why trust him that he will bring an end to either war--he actually wants to expand the war in Afghanistan and invade Paksitan. He is takign the same position as Bush and Rice when it comes to Georgia and the Ukraine, and Poland, which could lead to shooting war with Russia. The fact that he hired Rahm Emannuel as his chief of staff has already infuriated the arab world. Sure, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he may improve our foreign policy and make nice with our enemies, but even before he has taken office, his actions and his words indicate that he will be as much the hawk as Bush and Cheney. Time will tell but it isn't looking good so far. I wouldn't be suprised if he actually gives MCain a cabinet post at this point.

As far as improving the economy, I don't think anyone can do much at this point politically to turn it around--the recession and possible coming dperesssion will need to run its course--actually, the more interference the government has in the markets, they worse the economy will be. FDR kept this country in a depression for years longer than it should have been by conitnually trying to fuck with things--it would have been over in 2 years if he just stayed out of it and let the markets correct themselves, but instead his and the Federal Reserve's meddling kept the country in a depression for 6 years longer. This was done on purpose, btw. You can already see how Paulson's and Bernanke's fucking with the economy is doing--headed right for the shitter, and each time they open their mouths, the markets get worse. We have our Treasury Secretary playing eeny miney moe with with which companies he bails out--that is a very bad thing. Unless Obama plans on nationalizing the entire economy, he isn't going to be able to fix the current mess quickly, but with all due respect to him, no President could at this point. I don't blame him at all for the economy and I won't blame him if stays this way, as long as his actions don't make it worse, but history is weird that way, when you look at and see that each time the govermnet tries to improve the economy, and especially for politcal purposes, it gets much much worse, every single time.

[pharmboy]

OK I agree it doesn't sound too great. So McCains version would sound

better ? I think not.

This isn't the last word on the subject, maybe someone with a mind will

intervene. You never know.

[jab]

I voted for Ron Paul too.. call it a wasted vote.. call it pssing the in the wind.. call it whatever you like..

BUT, my conscience is clear!

[clinton]

he is a politician
im not surprised
they are all ran by someone else as it is....
positive change rarely happens

[bigNasty]

btw. Obama isn't president OP
the..OP..didnt..say..Obama..was..president

[Duckfeet]

So's mine: and if I had written in RPaul in the general, my conscience *wouldn't* have been as clean...so we obviously have different consciences:p...I've written in enough libertarian candidates...I'll support them in the primaries, but in the general, I vote for the best of two candidates... I spent much of my youth in a country that had, oh, 20-30 active political parties...and no one party, or president, ever had enough power to get anything done...this was why Argentina, peridocially, the military had to take over...just to save the country...

Ron Paul *knows* that himself: why do you think he ran as *republican* both in Houston, and in the nationals(rather than as libertarian)? Cuz he's a pragmatist...and anyway, yer not allowed to be quixotic once yer beard turns white: it's breaking the "old guy" rules....;)


I voted for Ron Paul too.. call it a wasted vote.. call it pssing the in the wind.. call it whatever you like..

BUT, my conscience is clear!

[edhorfin]

Surprising choice, considering how much drug use he must have encountered in Chicago...I always thought liberals were interested in treatment as opposed to prison for users.

I hate the fact that getting high in the privacy of my home makes me a criminal.

Sucks

[Duckfeet]

Me too, my friend, me too...

Surprising choice, considering how much drug use he must have encountered in Chicago...I always thought liberals were interested in treatment as opposed to prison for users.

I hate the fact that getting high in the privacy of my home makes me a criminal.

Sucks

[Badly Drawn Girl]

My vote for Obama had nothing to do with his view on drugs. And I'll reserve my judgment until I see the new administration in action.

[SeVeN]

I wrote in Ron Paul on a mail in ballot--not a wasted vote at all. I don't beleive in voting for the lesser of two evils as it is still an endordsemnt of evil. MCain certainly would have been bad on the drug policy if elected, but the only thing I thought Obama would do and why I did hope he would win over McCain, was to ease up the drug war which has become a war on on doctors and patients mroe than aything else

. The pick of Holder means doctors are still going to be just as gun shy as they were under Bush, and the jails will still be full of non-violent kids who didn't hurt anybody. Now, how is Obama "better" than McCain if his drug policy is going to be same? He continues to stab his supporters in the back with each pick he makes, juxst like Bush did to conservatives over the last 8 years. Democrat, Republican, there is no difference anymore, just who is more effective at pre-election pandering and lying. Once they get elected, they do whatever the fuck they want regardless of what their supporters want. Goverment for the People, By the People? What a joke.

The biggest myth is that it is your patritoic duty to vote for Presidnet, even if you don't agree with them-now how is it patritoic if I vote for someone who seeks to take away my rights? That's why it was not a wasted vote to write in Ron Paul, as he was the only candidate from the entire election cycle that gave two shits about individual rights.

I voted for Ron Paul. A so-called "wasted vote".

Like yours actually counted...





Edit: I am so confused .

[RxQueen]

I wrote in Ron Paul on a mail in ballot--not a wasted vote at all. I don't beleive in voting for the lesser of two evils as it is still an endordsemnt of evil. MCain certainly would have been bad on the drug policy if elected, but the only thing I thought Obama would do and why I did hope he would win over McCain, was to ease up the drug war which has become a war on on doctors and patients mroe than aything else
<snip>

did you honestly think this? even after he made his choice of VP biden? you know about biden's extensive anti-drug record don't you? the whole position of "drug czar," the rave act laws... check it out, man. if you really thought that the drug war would be eased up on with biden on obama's team, you didn't do your research.

still, i'm of the opinion that any vote for ANY politician is an endorsement of evil in some degree. i would've loved to see ron paul take office, strictly for his views on personal liberties and his stance on drugs, but i'm proud of my vote for obama for other reasons. mccain would've been the worst choice possible for america at this point in history. IMHO.

[Duckfeet]

Me too: I thought RPaul was hopeless dream, but I gave it my best...and then I switched to independent...and voted for Obama for reasons that are real easy to criticize...unless people remember Selma AL, and Little Rock AR, and horrible lynchings...and all our pretentious pronouncements about liberty and freedom and justice for all: nice words, but we withheld them from black people for too long...this was just a little nudge in the direction we should have been going in long before I was born...

Will Obama be like every other policitican?: probably, nothing I've seen has convinced me different...but again: I wanted people around the world, from the Ivory Coast of Africa to the Mississippi Delta in America, to know we were finally trying to measure up to our promise, so long denied in this county, to anybody who looked at all like our next president...


did you honestly think this? even after he made his choice of VP biden? you know about biden's extensive anti-drug record don't you? the whole position of "drug czar," the rave act laws... check it out, man. if you really thought that the drug war would be eased up on with biden on obama's team, you didn't do your research.

still, i'm of the opinion that any vote for ANY politician is an endorsement of evil in some degree. i would've loved to see ron paul take office, strictly for his views on personal liberties and his stance on drugs, but i'm proud of my vote for obama for other reasons. mccain would've been the worst choice possible for america at this point in history. IMHO.

[reddragon3668]

I don't think Holder is a surprising choice at all. While the choice itself my say something about how the Obama administration is going to approach the war on drugs, its definitely NOT set in stone. Obama will have allot of influence over the DOJ's agenda and resources. I'd say let's just wait and see rather than worrying about something that hasn't happened yet.

[bigNasty]

I wanted people around the world, from the Ivory Coast of Africa to the Mississippi Delta in America...
you__been__here__before__duck?

and__im__not__on__the__ivory__coast,__but__it__doe s__look__alot__like__africa__here

[samsong]

Here is a link to a new interview with Ron Paul--he talks about what he thinks Obama will do on foreign policy and the economy about half way through this interview. He doesn't get into the war on drugs unfortuantley in this interview, but if you love Ron Paul and the priciniples he stands for, it is worth the 5 minute read. I also hihgly recommend Paul's suggestion to read Murray Rothbard's book on the Great Depression--I am in the middle of an online study group of Rothbard currently. Ron Paul and Murray Rothbard were good friends--Rothbard is credited with defining modern day American libertarianism in economic terms, what Rothbard called anarcho capitalism. Very stark contrasts to the Democrats Keynesian view of how our economy should operate (and how our economy does actually operate now--we do not have free market capitalism in this country nor have we ever had it)

Liberty all starts with the economy, and how the government needs to stay out of it completely. Our Founders knew this, von Mises knew it, Rothbard knew it, Lew Rockwell knows it, Ron Paul knows it, votes on it and lives it. Anyway, if you are a Paul supporter, take a read, and spend some time going thorugh the archives on www.lewrockwell.com (http://www.lewrockwell.com), he is perhaps even more libertarian thatn Ron Paul:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul493.html

[pharmboy]

I dont wish anyone dead BUT lets just hope that five or six Supreme Court


justice's get a uncontrollable need to retire in the next four to eight years.:D

[OxyContinuously]

Nope, I didn't vote for Obama....I would *never* vote for an obama, not in a million fuckin years

[Duckfeet]

Yup: many many times...hell, why do u think I know where Midnight, Mississippi is? And I know that on the level we actually live it, it's a whole other ballgame: when I talk about all this stuff, I'm coming from a different place, and arguing from a historical perspective w/much wary sadness thrown in...but I keep my shit tight in certain neighborhoods...I've done much of my life in S. Louisiana, worked out of Alabama etc., and I've been locked up for years, when whites were the minority, and preyed upon in horrible ways...so I know, I know...

Its way different talking about this stuff from a lily-white beach town in SoCal...than in the middle of the shitstorm...


you__been__here__before__duck?

and__im__not__on__the__ivory__coast,__but__it__doe s__look__alot__like__africa__here