Drug War Policy for Democrats

case#46cw39

Muse
C
Joined
Aug 25, 2010
Messages
607
Is it Democratic to wage a drug war on 30 million free innocent American people? If this policy is advanced are we not then in disagreement with the politician advancing it, or not truly Democratic? Obama has been identified as the worst president ever for medical marijuana by NORML. In the last 3 months he has launched a major offensive on Oregon and California, and is now moving into Colorado, destroying state rights and individual liberty. That makes him a phony Democrat. So should people who push him be considered phony Democrats? I consider a basic Democratic Policy to include support for the Constitutional right of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness".

Since Obama has proven he is against these basic, fundamental American principles that are supposedly the foundation of the Democratic Party then he should not be supported by Democrats for the same reason as Paul: Policy differences. These basic American principles of the Democratic Party can be summed up easily.

1. "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and, under a Just God, cannot long retain it." --Abraham Lincoln, letter to H.L. Pierce, April 6, 1859.

And who denies freedom to others, and so are Anti American Treasoners, who should NEVER LEAD Free Americans?

2.The U.S. Declaration of Independence clearly identifies the deniers of freedom:

“A prince whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a TYRANT, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people." —U.S. Declaration of Independence July 4th 1776

*** Has not America, according the the above, been taken over by Tyrants?
*** Can a Democrat support anyone based on their policies, given this?

I think we Democrats must make the Drug War Issue a top level issue and PLANK in the PLATFORM and demand someone who will follow the Constitution. We can not afford to sweep this under the carpet again, and get an Obama, who is no better then a Republican, (except Ron Paul.) We need a Democrat who is loud and clear with his policy for ending this very expensive, illegal, Un-American war on innocent, non-violent American citizens.

We won't be fooled again.
 
Last edited:
Welcome to America, where Liberals are right of center and alcohol is legal but weed is treated like a dangerous drug. Also can you provide a link to exactly what you're referring to in your first paragraph? I certainly wouldn't classify Obama as a tyrant by an means but a typically conservative Democratic Politician with an ounce of liberalism.
 
Obama's war on medical marijuana has been one of the biggest disappointments, perhaps the biggest disappointment of his administration to me.
 
Obama: From First to Worst on Medical Marijuana
by Rob Kampia MPP
During his run for the presidency, Barack Obama instilled hope in medical marijuana supporters by pledging to respect state laws on the matter. ... Yet suddenly, and with no logical explanation, over the past eight months he has become arguably the worst president in U.S. history regarding medical marijuana.
http://blog.mpp.org/prohibition/obama-from-first-to-worst-on-medical-marijuana/10112011/
Oct 2011

The Next State In The Federal Government’s Crosshairs Is Colorado
"In recent months, the federal Justice Department has engaged in concerted efforts to crack down on the proliferation of medical cannabis related activities in states that allow for its therapeutic use under state law, including California, Montana, Oregon and Washington.

Now, according to a CBS News report, the next state on the federal government’s ‘hit list’ is Colorado — arguably the state with the most comprehensive and stringent statewide regulations governing medical cannabis activities."
http://blog.norml.org/2011/12/14/the-next-state-in-the-federal-governments-crosshairs-is-colorado/ Dec 2011

If you were asking about my labeling him a tyrant, I used the Declaration of Independence and Lincoln's principle - two main, foundational, US principles.

So the argument is:

1. "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves, and, under a Just God, cannot long retain it." --Abraham Lincoln, letter to H.L. Pierce, April 6, 1859.

And who denies freedom to others, and so are Anti American Treasoners, who should NEVER LEAD Free Americans?

2.The U.S. Declaration of Independence clearly identifies the deniers of freedom:

“A prince whose character is thus marked by every act [such as denying freedom] which may define a TYRANT, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people." —U.S. Declaration of Independence July 4th 1776

3. Obama denies freedom to others.

Conclusion: Obama is a tyrant.
 
Last edited:
Juniversal said:
I remember that thread. The contortions one has to do to justify the "war on drugs" (particularly the war on marijuana) is pretty pathetic. I remember reading a quote from some official implying the war on drugs has been successful because there are apparently fewer users now then in the past, ignoring the turmoil, death and plight that's a direct result of it's illegality.
Click to expand...

That's the problem making legalization so hard. Nobody know all the facts about the issue, so we go round and round. For example, how many anti legalization people know that Portugal legalized all drugs in 2000? So we have an empirical case of what happens when the drug war is ended.

THE PORTUGAL CASE

A report was done in 2011, Drug Policy in Portugal: The Benefits of Decriminalizing Drug Use August 2011:

"In 2000, the Portuguese government responded to widespread public concern over drugs by rejecting a "war on drugs" approach and instead decriminalized drug possession and use. It further rebuffed convention by placing the responsibility for decreasing drug demand as well as managing dependence under the Ministry of Health, rather than the Ministry of Justice. With this, the official response toward drug-dependent persons shifted from viewing them as criminals, to treating them as patients. ... Now, with a decade of experience, Portugal provides a valuable case study of how decriminalization coupled with evidence-based strategies can reduce drug consumption, dependence, recidivism, and HIV infection, and create safer communities for all."
http://www.soros.org/initiatives/dr...publications/drug-policy-in-portugal-20110829

"In 2001 Portugal became the first European country to officially abolish all criminal penalties for personal possession of drugs, including marijuana, cocaine, heroin and methamphetamine.

At the recommendation of a national commission charged with addressing Portugal's drug problem, jail time was replaced with the offer of therapy. The argument was that the fear of prison drives addicts underground and that incarceration is more expensive than treatment — so why not give drug addicts health services instead? Under Portugal's new regime, people found guilty of possessing small amounts of drugs are sent to a panel consisting of a psychologist, social worker and legal adviser for appropriate treatment (which may be refused without criminal punishment), instead of jail.

The question is, does the new policy work? At the time, critics in the poor, socially conservative and largely Catholic nation said decriminalizing drug possession would open the country to "drug tourists" and exacerbate Portugal's drug problem; the country had some of the highest levels of hard-drug use in Europe. But the recently released results of a report commissioned by the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank, suggest otherwise.

The Cato paper reports that between 2001 and 2006 in Portugal, rates of lifetime use of any illegal drug among seventh through ninth graders fell from 14.1% to 10.6%; drug use in older teens also declined. Lifetime heroin use among 16-to-18-year-olds fell from 2.5% to 1.8% New HIV infections in drug users fell by 17% between 1999 and 2003, and deaths related to heroin and similar drugs were cut by more than half. In addition, the number of people on methadone and buprenorphine treatment for drug addiction rose to 14,877 from 6,040, after decriminalization, and money saved on enforcement allowed for increased funding of drug-free treatment as well.

Compared to the European Union and the U.S., Portugal's drug use numbers are impressive. Following decriminalization, Portugal had the lowest rate of lifetime marijuana use in people over 15 in the E.U.: 10%. The most comparable figure in America is in people over 12: 39.8%. Proportionally, more Americans have used cocaine than Portuguese have used marijuana.

The Cato report's author, Greenwald, hews to the first point: that the data shows that decriminalization does not result in increased drug use. Since that is what concerns the public and policymakers most about decriminalization, he says, "that is the central concession that will transform the debate."
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1893946,00.html#ixzz1h8s8SEzP
 
Last edited:
Tobacco-Related Health Costs: $800; Booze-Related Health Costs: $165; Pot-Related Health Costs: $20 — Any Questions?
http://blog.norml.org/2009/11/17/do-...any-questions/

"Health-related costs per user are eight times higher for drinkers than they are for those who use cannabis, and are more than 40 times higher for tobacco smokers, according to a report published in the British Columbia Mental Health and Addictions Journal.

According to the report, “In terms of [health-related] costs per user: tobacco-related health costs are over $800 per user, alcohol-related health costs are much lower at $165 per user, and cannabis-related health costs are the lowest at $20 per user.”
 
C'mon. Everyone knows "medical marijuana" is a nudge-nudge, wink-wink crock.
 
What's it like being on the same side as the guy who wrote the raving idiotic tract in the OP?
 
Virus said:
C'mon. Everyone knows "medical marijuana" is a nudge-nudge, wink-wink crock.
Click to expand...

Did you see Weed Wars? They showed a 4 year old with extreme epilepsy, horrible shakes, zoned out. His father took him to dispensary and got a tincture that has the psychoactive THC removed and just the other ingredient in it. So the kid took drops of the tincture and after a couple of days the father reported that he had no shakes for 4 days and was humming meaning not zoned out for the first time. That made a believer for me. This was the only medicine that worked for this kid and so keeping him away from it is disgraceful.

And there are studies involving loss of appetite and nausea. For example:

Study: Inhaled Cannabis Modulates Appetite Hormones In HIV Patients
Thursday, 15 December 2011

"San Diego, CA: Cannabis inhalation is associated with increased levels of appetite hormones in the blood of subjects with HIV infection, according to clinical trial data published online in the scientific journal Brain Research."
http://norml.org/news/2011/12/15/study-inhaled-cannabis-modulates-appetite-hormones-in-hiv-patients

There are studies on pain relief and other things as well, so I'm a believer in its medical value.

But in 2012 it's now way beyond medical marijuana; it's about ending the drug war completely ala Portugal. This is no longer radical. There is an organization called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition LEAP.CC who are actively working for this. And this is a group of respectable, mainstream Police and DEA officers who worked on the front lines and see the war hasn't worked. So we aren't talking about easily dismissed hippies and lefties anymore.

"LEAP Vision Statement
LEAP envisions a world in which drug policies work for the benefit of society and keep our communitie*s safer. A system of legalizati*on and regulation will end the violence, better protect human rights, safeguard our children, reduce crime and disease, treat drug abusers as patients, reduce addiction, use tax dollars more efficientl*y, and restore the public’s respect and trust in law enforcemen*t."

LEAP Mission Statement
The mission of LEAP is to reduce the multitude of unintended harmful consequenc*es resulting from fighting the war on drugs and to lessen the incidence of death, disease, crime, and addiction by ending drug prohibition."
WWW.LEAP.CC

There are many people who know it must end. The question is how do we get it done? I'm suggesting in the OP advancing a Democratic Party Platform Plank that calls precisely for ending the Drug War, gives the precise reasons and legal principles why this should be done, and gives a specific time table to do it. We liberal Democrats call on the D. Party to debate this publically and put it on their Platform for 2012. No more BS. We won't get fooled again.
 
Last edited:
Virus said:
What's it like being on the same side as the guy who wrote the raving idiotic tract in the OP?
Click to expand...

If you mean the first post on this thread, then you would have to make your case on exactly what you find "idiotic" and why, to be logical and have something to discuss.
 
case#46cw39 said:
If you mean the first post on this thread, then you would have to make your case on exactly what you find "idiotic" and why, to be logical and have something to discuss.
Click to expand...

Drivel asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
 
Mmm. Yeah. Getting high. Such an indispensable freedom. Obama is a big meanie for not abolishing laws that most people want.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom