Good, what druglords fear most isn't DEA agents (they have tons of expendable middleman goons to do their dirty work) , it's a populace that's educated and recovered from their product.

Don't count on this getting anywhere. There are far too many entrenched interests who make hundreds of millions of dollars off the drug war. The private prison industry is certainly the prime suspect, but don't forget that the entire DEA bureaucracy (and budget) is predicated on the "war" aspect of drug enforcement: They will not lightly give up that money or power. The list of those with similar vested interests in continuing the failed policies is disturbingly long--Customs, Coast Guard, Treasury, state and local law enforcement, "law-n-order" politicians, and so on.

Gonna be a real up-hill fight to bring common sense to bear.

it's a populace that's educated and recovered from their product.

Unfortunately, that means a populace that has been addicted to their product. I mean, that's the only way you can "recover."

Yes, we have an addicted populace. That's why drug dealers dig mile long undeground tunnels beneath "enforced borders" to get their product into the U.S. And your point is........

Lower taxes and encourage small businesses. Let these inner city youths see that the way to the bling isn't always through drug dealing. Maybe if they could actually start a productive business without being taxed to Kingdom Come, they wouldn't sell dimebags.

Jeebus, McGruber, you really think lower taxes is the answer to absolutely everything, don't you? That's hilarious. Lower taxes will lift the underclass from their drug-ravaged, gang-ridden lifestyle. Unbelievalbe.

BTW, Rush Limbaugh avoided jail time and went through treatment to recover from addiction to painkillers. So did Brett Favre.

In fact, less than a week after Holder announced the marijuana raids would stop, guess what?

The Obama administration raided another marijuana clinic in San Francisco http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/03/30/medical-pot-advocates-fea_n_180972.html
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/03/31/dea-marijuana-raid-kills-buzz-from-obama-administrations-new-po/

Claiming this raid was based on "tax" issues, neither the IRS nor the State Board of Equalization was in on the raid and for reasons no one can even guess, all plants were seized.

So what I take from this article is that the obama administration will rename the failed drug policies of the past, but continue them all the same.

After all, our banking system would have collapsed decades ago had it not been for their continued laundering of illegal drug money. Moreover Big Pharma will never ever allow marijuana to be legalized because they can't profit from it.

So please, before we go trumpeting the "new" drug policies of the Obama administration, let's remember that despite the cute name changes, it's same ole same ole and aint nothin gonna change it.

Sheesh you peeps are gullible...

Plus, don't most parents teach their kids not to use drugs? If the parents can't get through to their children, why is a government program going to work?

Unfortunately, no. Too many parents today aren't involved in their children's lives. Will the government solve that? Hmmmm... maybe the better question is how will the Christian right's attacks on gays help that?

I fail to understand how in a "free country" we even ban certain substances. Regulate them and regulate behavior associated with their use yes, but Prohibition did not work with alcohol and the "War on Drugs" did not work either. One of the early commentators is right--there is too much money to be made by keeping drugs illegal to ever go to a regulation mode. The bottom line is that everyone is running out of money to chase and lock up people in connection with drugs and there are some moneyed folks--Big Pharma-- who could benefit from regulation rather than prohibition. Personally, I see little evidence that Obama gets it.

It's amazing how the position of babbling village idiot is always filled on this site. The consevatives,republicans,tea baggers or whatever you want to call them firmly believe the jibberish that the McGrubers of the world spew out.
One of the most destructive drugs there is(alcohol)is legal. Hell the hero of these dimwits was or still is a major drug abuser(Rush Limpdick). Face people they just don't get it.

Marijuana should be legalized and taxed. Treatment should be available to all drug users and the first option for users in the criminal justice system. Addictive substances should be treated first as a health issue, dealing should remain criminalized.

This is a welcome change.

Also, McGruber, I'm sorry your life is so awful.

"Obama's Justice Department has scrapped federal raids on legal medical marijuana clubs established in states".

Well except for the raid last week in California by the Feds. Scrapped, maybe, but someone ought to let the Feds in on that plan.

@McGrubber
Plus, don't most parents teach their kids not to use drugs? If the parents can't get through to their children, why is a government program going to work?

In a perfect world, parents should be able to teach their kids right and wrong 100% of the time and everyone would abide by strict parental guidance. This piece of logic works only if all parents provided quality guidance, are of sound mind, and don't use illicit drugs. You're also making a false assumption the rampant drug use is primarily practiced by children/young adults who do not listen to their parents. This is also a false assumption that does not address the issue of addiction. You are ignoring realities.

You want to win the War on Drugs? Start enforcing the border.

Enforcing the boarder does not necessarily negate other illicit drugs from being manufactured right here in the United States. Again, you're solution is a band-aid on a festering wound and does not address the issue of addiction, even if complete border control would be possible.

Lower taxes and encourage small businesses. Let these inner city youths see that the way to the bling isn't always through drug dealing. Maybe if they could actually start a productive business without being taxed to Kingdom Come, they wouldn't sell dimebags.

I have no idea where to start unpacking this paragraph loaded with stereotypes. I hope you don't think rampant drug use is localized to innercities and minorities. If so you should stop posting right now.

The percentage of the populace addicted to drugs is small. However, it is quite lucrative, which explains the length to which these drug dealers will go to get their product into the U.S.

So no, we don't have an addicted populace.

I see, so your argument is dancing around the semantics of the meaning of "populace". I take populace in this context to mean "a population", as in there is "a population" of addicts in this country. You apparently think populace means every man, woman, and child.

From the Almanac of Policy issues 2001
http://www.policyalmanac.org/crime/archive/drug_abuse.shtml

In 2001, an estimated 15.9 million Americans aged 12 or older were current illicit drug users, meaning they had used an illicit drug during the month prior to the survey interview. This estimate represents 7.1 percent of the population aged 12 years old or older.

I would call that a sizable "populace".

"In fact, less than a week after Holder announced the marijuana raids would stop, guess what?"

The entrenched DEA/FBI bureaucracy sneezed again, that's what. And it happened only once. *ONCE*. It hasn't happened again since then. Or if it has, people like you have been far too lazy to ever provide links to it; you've been using this one case for months now. Either way, it tells me that medical marijuana raiding *is* slowing down, because otherwise we'd hear a lot more about it.

Why can't you people learn how to be patient? I know we can't expect that from the right-wing extremists. They have a direct political interest in attacking Obama for not being a miracle worker and not being able to fix decades of GOP incompetence in 4 months. But getaclue, you and others like you need to follow the advice of your screen name.

If you seriously think that Obama isn't changing anything regarding drug enforcement, then you haven't been paying attention over the past 20 years. Just for starters, compare Gil Kerlikowske's statement to the diarrhea still being spewed by John Walters, Dubya's drug czar for the past 8 years. Or do a Google search for that asshat Bill Bennet and check out his con games.

Like it or not, a major federal bureaucrat talking like this is serious progress. And if you sneer at that and refuse to agree, then you have no clue at all how this needs to work. 40 years of drug warring, with all the inter-connected entrenched interests (industrial prison complex, law enforcement, pharmaceutical companies eager to block competition, etc.) is not going to vanish with a sweep of Obama's pen and a conscious-lifting speech. It is going to take time, effort, and congressional action.

And whining about how Obama's magic wand hasn't worked yet won't get you or the rest of us anywhere. It does, however, reveal you to be a small-minded partisan who doesn't understand the issue you're whining about.

FYI - Marijuana is not addictive.

Wow, there really is a Matthew DeLong. I assumed you were linking either to Matthew Yglesias or Brad DeLong and simply mashed the names together.

Lower the taxes and help revitalize the inner city. Encourage youngsters to build families and stop glamorizing "baby daddies" and whatnot. When you have a strong nuclear family and the ability to start your own job, or get a traditional job in a small company, then the life of drugs and gangs isn't so cool.

Okay, McG, you got me on that one. I was just one tax increase away from leaving my wife and two small children to join a gang. Because tax policy is what has destroyed the inner city and the nuclear family.

/sarcasm

Moreover Big Pharma will never ever allow marijuana to be legalized because they can't profit from it.

Big Tobacco will make a fortune from marijuana legalisation, as their machines can roll a big fat one more consistently and cheaply, and of better quality, than you could ever do at home. Once the marketeers get to work, why would you grow your own?

Paper/fabric/farming/bio-diesel (especially big oil) companies will make big money too. The government will make a fortune in tax, and save on the stupid marketing campaign.

And you know what - the military and police budgets will not be cut, regardless of legalisation. You know this is a fact.

FYI - marijuana is not PHYSICALLY addictive. It certainly can be emotionally and mentally addictive, meaning that marijuana addicts adopt many of the same self-destructive patterns and thought processes as those addicted to alcohol or gambling or cocaine.

Unfortunately, that means a populace that has been addicted to their product

% of US population addicted to various drugs(opiates, cocaine, cannabis - not incl alcohol) prior to 1914(Harrison Narcotics Act): 1.4%

% of US population addicted to illegal drugs in 2006: 1.4%
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0948435/plotsummary

Cost to achieve zero reduction in addiction rates over 94 years? You tell me - Federal expenses alone, excluding costs of trial and incarceration (which are the big cost drivers) are over $1 trillion. I've no idea how much has been spent by state and municipal governments and no motivation to try to figure that out. I am comfortable addressing it as a shitload of good money after bad.

Among the problems are gateway drugs, particularly cannabis and other mild psychotropics such as psilocybin and MDMA.
The problem, however is most assuredly NOT the substances themselves or their use by young people.
The problem, is that after they or acquaintances try them and come to no perceptible harm, the children begin to wonder: What else have my parents, teachers, and government been LYING to me about?
That's a very effective way to encourage them to continue experimenting with more dangerous drugs, as well as other prohibited or discouraged behaviors which are un-related to drugs. And it's extremely corrosive to respect for the rule of law.

The media does bear some responsibility; the phenomena of pushing sensational stories to increase sales didn't start in the 60's. You can trace the rise in glue-sniffing to an article in the Denver Post, circa 1948(memory fuzzy - I'd have to dig out a copy of the research paper I co-wrote, Lexis-Nexis sourced). Said article actually went so far as to suggest a means of inhaling glue - one which the young men in the story hadn't even used. Not long after that, said method was discovered in use.

FYI - Marijuana is not addictive.

YMMV

Prohibition of alcohol was a tremendous success in creating organized crime.

Prohibition of 'drugs' has been a tremendous success in creating organized crime.

The end of the prohibition of alcohol was a major factor in reducing organized criminal activity and violence.

The end of the prohibition of 'drugs' will be...

Having said that, I think I'll go home and smoke a J.

At last.

You're late, Steve. Kerlikowske announced this policy change a couple months ago.

"... as their machines can roll a big fat one more consistently and cheaply, and of better quality, than you could ever do at home."

I've actually witnessed this happening once in the late Seventies. I was doing some work in a research lab then testing marijuana's various properties. As I recall, they grew the stuff in some federally-owned land in Kentucky shipped it to Winston-Salem, machined rolled it like filterless cigarettes, and stuffed them all in a barrel. They then advertised in the local paper for people to come test it out.

So please, before we go trumpeting the "new" drug policies of the Obama administration, let's remember that despite the cute name changes, it's same ole same ole and aint nothin gonna change it.

Sheesh you peeps are gullible...
Posted by: getaclue on May 14, 2009

No pony?

I think it's obvious to a lot of people that if you spend hundreds of billions and it doesn't stop the stuff then you're wasting money and man-power. Aren't Repubs against big wasteful government?

If the alternative is to *only* help people recover when they're having problems, then that's what we'll do.

If these things become obvious to enough people, then the politicians will follow. It's like the health care reform. Once enough people were going broke paying the health care industry they had to join together (almost like tribal warfare) to fight it. It's not about right or wrong or liberal or conservative.

Why can't you people learn how to be patient? I know we can't expect that from the right-wing extremists. They have a direct political interest in attacking Obama for not being a miracle worker and not being able to fix decades of GOP incompetence in 4 months. But getaclue, you and others like you need to follow the advice of your screen name.

The new "We have to keep our powder dry!" Get some new talking points, Obamabots.

"Get some new talking points, Obamabots."

When you successfully debunk the old ones, I'm sure they will. Get to work.