My God, you are an idiot.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Adder

I doubt this will ever become law, thankfully, but it's surprising that the House majority would think it's a good idea.

Perhaps they felt that the White House was threatening their status as top-of-the-heap eroders of civil liberties.

On a related note, what is behind Obama's new policy on Med Pot?

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

But perhaps these socks have already admitted they were foolish, and thus I can stop?

Never forget.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

AND Adder, there is a question, implicit perhaps but there. the point from the start of these posts was to teach these socks that daily railed on against W that W was simply doing that which any president would do. The beautiful parallels between the two presidents' decisions is more than I had hoped for. But perhaps these socks have already admitted they were foolish, and thus I can stop?

You can call it "beautiful" but I'd go with "depressing." Especially if you think that W and Obama are just doing that which any president would do, and you don't mean that from a public choice perspective.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

On a related note, what is behind Obama's new policy on Med Pot?

I think they are denying that it is really new, but I don't know. Makes no sense to me.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

I'm not, but were there an R in front of his name, most here would not be so supportive.

Were there an R in front of his name, you and Hank would be crowing about this as a victory for a resurgent America, and trashing anyone who dissented. Double-standards indeed.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Adder

I think they are denying that it is really new, but I don't know. Makes no sense to me.

It's definitely new. They are going to start enforcement activities in CA. I don't get why he would push this.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

It's definitely new. They are going to start enforcement activities in CA. I don't get why he would push this.

Because some idiots are using medical pot as a front to make a bunch of drug money?

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Were there an R in front of his name, you and Hank would be crowing about this as a victory for a resurgent America, and trashing anyone who dissented. Double-standards indeed.

I think it is a victory. Obama has been pretty strong on the war on terror front (or whatever he is calling it to distance himself from Bush era policies). So, no, try again.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Were there an R in front of his name, you and Hank would be crowing about this as a victory for a resurgent America, and trashing anyone who dissented. Double-standards indeed.

You missed where we do say it is a victory for America? It is.

[sgtclub]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Because some idiots are using medical pot as a front to make a bunch of drug money?

And . . . ?

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

It's definitely new. They are going to start enforcement activities in CA. I don't get why he would push this.

I don't either. I certainly hope it's not politically motivated, as an attempt to look like he's moving to the "center." Both because I think that would be stupid politically, ineffective and disappointingly cynical.

But I can't think of any way this makes sense.

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by sgtclub

And . . . ?

And.... you really don't understand?

What did you get a prescription for?

Leave aside that big-time marijuana dealers are not exactly the most wonderful folk (the 60s being long over, and Weeds being fiction). Do you think the Obama Admin has a vested interest in not suggesting that states can decide when to ignore federal law? Particularly when a state's rationale is "health" based?

[Sidd Finch]

Originally Posted by Adder

I don't either. I certainly hope it's not politically motivated, as an attempt to look like he's moving to the "center." Both because I think that would be stupid politically, ineffective and disappointingly cynical.

But I can't think of any way this makes sense.

Seriously?

The medical marijuana law had some good aspects, but it's been subject to ridiculous abuse.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Seriously?

The medical marijuana law had some good aspects, but it's been subject to ridiculous abuse.

do states tax med weed? I hope they tax the shit out of it.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch

Seriously?

The medical marijuana law had some good aspects, but it's been subject to ridiculous abuse.

Which means it's wise for Obama/Holder to back track on prior statements to direct resources toward an already failed war on drugs?