It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

On marijuana: What Clinton, Sanders would do

page: 1
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 06:59 AM
link   
On marijuana: What Clinton, Sanders would do

I've pretty much known what Sanders' opinion on marijuana was before the debate, but the person I was always leery about was Clinton. She spent quite a long time on the fence. Apparently she has tested the waters and found that it is ok to have a favorable opinion on marijuana. Phew! I was worried there. I mean what's more likely A) All the propaganda from the 1930's and the 1980's is true or B) the scientists who have been yelling and presenting evidence since the 1930's that pot isn't bad for you? That really is a tough choice to make... Well last night at the debate, Mrs. Clinton finally decided to make a choice.

First, the winner of the two. Sanders.


Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders, who commands the liberal left with his economic policy positions, said he would vote in favor of a local Nevada measure that would legalize recreational pot use.

"I would vote yes because I am seeing in this country too many lives being destroyed for non-violent offenses," he said. "We have a criminal justice system that lets CEOs on Wall Street walk away, and yet we are imprisoning or giving jail sentences to young people who are smoking marijuana."


HA! Damn right! Go Sanders! Can't add any more than that.


For former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, the answer was hazier.


Naturally... Remember that choice earlier? It's a tough one to make.



Asked if she was ready to take a position on legalizing recreational marijuana, she replied, "No."


Sigh...


"I think that we have the opportunity through the states that are pursuing recreational marijuana to find out a lot more than we know today," she said. "I do support the use of medical marijuana, and I think even there we need to do a lot more research so that we know exactly how we're going to help people for whom medical marijuana provides relief."

But Clinton said she agreed with Sanders on reforming the criminal justice system when it comes to punishment for pot.

"We have got to stop imprisoning people who use marijuana," she said. "Therefore, we need more states, cities, and the federal government to begin to address this so that we don't have this terrible result that Senator Sanders was talking about where we have a huge population in our prisons for nonviolent, low-level offenses that are primarily due to marijuana."


Alright. I'll give you a C for making progress. At least she's on board with medical marijuana and wants to reform the justice system away from over criminalizing marijuana. My source agrees.


Both answers, however, mark just how far the political conversation surrounding marijuana has come since 2008.

Tom Angell, chairman of the pro-pot group Marijuana Majority, said, "Legalization is at the forefront of mainstream American politics, and politicians are starting to treat it as such."

"As a point of reference, in 2008 no major candidate even supported decriminalization when asked in a debate, and our movement had to chase them around New Hampshire and repeatedly harass them just to garner pledges to stop federal raids on state-legal medical marijuana patients," he said.


Though keep in mind, except for Rand Paul, the Republicans are still pretty much against marijuana in general.
edit on 14-10-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)




posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:02 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Not surprised.

Hillary is as establishment as you can get and like Obama, Bush II, Clinton et al is a just a puppet for TPTB which include big pharma and the prison industrial complex. She will no more legalize pot any more than the MIC will let her bring the USA any peace in the ME or the banks will let her make them pay for there mistakes.
edit on 14-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)

edit on 14-10-2015 by crazyewok because: (no reason given)


+20 more 
posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think she is just pandering to the pro-legalization crowd and has no intention of doing anything. She is a proven panderer and seeing her as anything but that is self-deluding.





edit on 14-10-2015 by AugustusMasonicus because: Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:08 AM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok

I see Clinton as a "goes with the political flow" kind of person. She only takes an opinion if she thinks it can generate more support for her. She isn't beholden to them and will instantly flip-flop if a different opinion will generate more support.

I saw this, this morning on Huff Po about her.

Hillary Clinton Leans In, Embraces Role Of First Female President


WASHINGTON -- Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton on Tuesday night emphasized the historic nature of her candidacy, highlighting the possibility that she could be the first female president in U.S. history.

Clinton largely avoided playing the gender card during the 2008 presidential campaign, but famously declared in her concession speech to Barack Obama that her candidacy had put "18 million cracks" in the glass ceiling. If there was any question of how much she’d focus on gender this time around, it was answered repeatedly on Tuesday night.

The former secretary of state delivered one of her strongest lines on the issue right out of the gate, saying during her introductory remarks that with her in the White House, “finally fathers will be able to say to their daughters, ‘You, too, can grow up to be president.’”

Asked how her presidency would be different from President Barack Obama's, she quickly responded, “Well, I think that’s pretty obvious. Being the first woman president would be quite a change from the presidents we've had, including President Obama.”


And the article goes on and on, practically gushing over the fact that Clinton is defining her gender in this political race much the same as Obama did his race in 2008. Clinton noticed that she can get an edge if she defines her minority status in the election, so she does. What's the result? Huff Po: *swoooooon*



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:09 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Exactly. See my post above this one.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t

Exactly. See my post above this one.


Yeah, she is just blowing marijuana smoke up everyone's asses.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:20 AM
link   
The stupid cow wants to wait it out and see what becomes of Colorado etc as if this is some new revelation that no-one knows the effects that it has on an individual.

I wish she was wearing a shock-collar that was linked to a thumbs-down button - the hag would have copped it through-out her vague lack-of-substance text-book scum career politician diatribe.

I am vehemently anti-big government so Bernie agrees with a lot of things that I say - go after banksters, elites and big pharma, deconstruct the current corporate-owned government and enhance the middle class.

I think Bernie might be copying my ATS posting history - bit frightening actually - I found myself nodding with most things he said.

Bernie was the clear winner in all facets of the debate by a country mile......

As things stand, the election will come down to Bernie or Trump for POTUS - no-one else has the citizens support like these two.

Oh, and legalize the bloody plant FFS!



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:22 AM
link   
This is one of the Democrats best issues as far as personal freedom
and common sense goes. In fact I think it is the HIGH water mark of
Obama's 8 years. They should be embracing this like no other.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
I am vehemently anti-big government so Bernie agrees with a lot of things that I say - go after banksters, elites and big pharma, deconstruct the current corporate-owned government and enhance the middle class.


I do not want to derail the thread but all of those issues are the result of government interfering in the market and creating loopholes which the average person cannot exploit. You need to end lobbying to end all of those problems.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:26 AM
link   
a reply to: nfflhome

Good point! Keep in mind that Obama didn't even campaign around marijuana in 2008, but even without that public support rose exponentially while he was President. Thus Obama changed policy to relax enforcement laws around the country. Perfect case of a politician listening to the changing desires of his constituency. Too bad the old bat is too slow on the uptake here... She has the perfect opportunity to take the layup that Obama is handing her and get an easy basket.
edit on 14-10-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Good point! Keep in mind that Obama didn't even campaign around marijuana in 2008,


No, her platform was, 'I have a vagina and the inexperienced black man has no birth certificate.'



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:32 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

Agreed, lobbynomics is destroying the intent of the constitutional republic where elected representatives are actually meant represent the citizens and not corporate interests.

Now, in my opinion, the legalization of MJ for recreational use is a logical thing to do simply because it is currently happening at the moment anyway, and has been for a very very long time, well before you or I were a twinkle in dads eye.

It is a veritable cash-cow waiting to fill the coffers and inject much needed revenue into the economy - imagine all that money going to infrastructure, health, education etc instead of lining the pockets of the CIA and drug lords et al.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
Agreed, lobbynomics is destroying the intent of the constitutional republic where elected representatives are actually meant represent the citizens and not corporate interests.


Agreed, but it goes well beyond corporations to all lobbying groups; unions, special interests, etc. They all have an agenda that is bought and paid for.


Now, in my opinion, the legalization of MJ for recreational use is a logical thing to do simply because it is currently happening at the moment anyway, and has been for a very very long time, well before you or I were a twinkle in dads eye.


I do not smoke and have no intention of doing so, however who am I to tell someone else what to do? There are too many non-violent offenders in with the real criminals.




edit on 14-10-2015 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:36 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

That's my read on her as well. She won't take a stand until her data shows her which way the popular sentiment is going. Basically, just another political hack with no backbone or principles, beyond what can garner favor and get her elected by the most people. Nothing new there.

This is another thing I respect about Bernie Sanders. He has been pretty vocal about where he stands on things, and is quite willing to defend his position, popular or not. He really seems to take actual stances on actual issues, something you don't see much from a lot of politicians.

I wonder if his holding firm will harm or help him, though? Our election system and social mentality does not seem to favor principle, reason, or honesty when it comes time to vote.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Sublimecraft

Seriously! I couldn't agree more. I can't understand why it is so anathema to Republican lawmakers to legalize weed. Most Democrats are at least on board with medical marijuana, if not flat out legalization. The prison incarceration rate is proof positive that jailing people for smoking or selling marijuana ISN'T going to stop people from smoking or selling marijuana. In fact, usage increases considerably despite it.

Of course there is also the fact that we proved all this once before with Prohibition. At least with that it didn't take close to 100 years for us to realize our mistake.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t


Greetings- I applaud You for taking up 'The Fight' but I cringe every time I read You type "marijuana" if You're going to use the Gov't. issued word at least write it as "marihuana" or the more direct "cannabis"...

I confess I did NOT watch the debates as playoff baseball is in full swing, so could You type Me if Billary stooped to the old tale that if white women smoked 'marihuana' they would run off with either black jazz musicians and/or Mexicans?

Keep Up the good fight...

namaste

Proud Member of LEAP



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   

originally posted by: Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
I wonder if his holding firm will harm or help him, though? Our election system and social mentality does not seem to favor principle, reason, or honesty when it comes time to vote.



I know... I've said for a while that I highly suspect that Bernie is going to get the Ron Paul treatment here. I can just only hope that America has finally learned its lesson and sees someone who actually STANDS for something for once.

Clinton is CLEARLY more of the same. She is so transparent it isn't even funny. But you have to be logical and reasonable to see the transparency. If you let yourself get swept up into her propaganda then you won't see it. She is the same exact candidate as she was in 2008. Only her rhetoric has changed. I just hope that the rest of America realizes it.

Though all in all, I'm shooting for a long shot. I REALLY don't want any of the Republicans to win and I only like Sanders from the Democrats. If he washes out of the primaries, I'm not sure who I'd support.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 07:48 AM
link   
a reply to: JimNasium

I had to give you a star for knowing the original spelling of marihuana


To be honest, the only slang term for weed that I don't like is "dope". I feel it perpetuates the (untrue) stereotype that weed makes you dumber.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:09 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Agreed. It just goes to show you how absolutely insane the times we live in are, when the only mainstream candidate who has made anything resembling sense so far is an admitted socialist.

I'm still likely to vote third party, depending on who is running. Now that I have seen the Republican line-up, I know none are electable for me. The Democratic ticket doesn't seem certain. I don't know how bad all the scandals are going to harm Clinton, as she and her other half have shown themselves capable sliding through scandal. However, she is female, and this country still can't seem to get past that particular barrier. So who knows.

What I do see is several more states legalizing recreational marijuana, with others either legalizing medicinal, or at least decriminalizing/lowering penalties for cannabis. The tide of scientific, medical, legal, and social consensus is moving more and more in favor of cannabis legalization, as well as the expansion of hemp production. It is an issue that both sides will oppose or ignore at their own peril.



posted on Oct, 14 2015 @ 08:12 AM
link   
Ok, maybe it's just me.


I do support the use of medical marijuana, and I think even there we need to do a lot more research so that we know exactly how we're going to help people for whom medical marijuana provides relief."


Anybody else think that statement is odd? How we are going to help people that marijuana helps?

I don't think she misspoke.

I do not trust her, one little bit.



new topics

top topics



 
23
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join