Shock and Awe: The Obama Administration Luckily Dodges Pot Question From Former Law Enforcement

The Obama administration's position on drugs can be summed up in this comment:

Our past three presidents have admitted to using marijuana. (Our past two have even admitted to using cocaine.) Can you imagine how different Barack Obama's life would have been had he been busted for marijuana (or even worse - cocaine)? Would he be Barry the ex-con working at McDonalds? I certainly don't think he would have had near the opportunities he has had if he had been arrested for possession. Based on personal experience, he surely realizes that marijuana use is not harmful or destructive and that prohibition disproportionally affects minorities and can severely harm someone's future. However, he metaphorically sticks his fingers in his ears and continues the same failed drug policies that have ruined the lives of so many American youth. It is absurd.

It comes from the LEAP blog post about the inevitable deflection of a top-awarded question posed by a former LAPD deputy chief:

WASHINGTON, DC -- Today YouTube ignored a question advocating marijuana legalization from a retired LAPD deputy chief of police that won twice as many votes as any other video question in the White House's "Your Interview with the President" competition on the Google-owned site. They did, however, find the time to get the president on record about late night snacking, singing and dancing, celebrating wedding anniversaries and playing tennis.

Well I'm really glad we have our priorities straight in this country.

In case you missed it, the question is here. It remains unanswered by the Obama administration. Keep that in mind come November if you seriously still support these fools.

Jr Deputy Accountant

Some say he’s half man half fish, others say he’s more of a seventy/thirty split. Either way he’s a fishy bastard.


Anonymous said...

If you are a LEO who supports prohibition what you are telling everyone is your poor job performance will not merit your employment once the government tit of prohibition runs dry. You are basically on government welfare because without it you'd be out of a job due to your poor skills as a police officer. You should look it up if you're a cop, there are a lot of unemployed veterans out there, and the number grows every day. I don't know a single veteran that doesn't own a firearm. Look what happened in Utah. 5 cops shot to pieces for kicking down the door of a veteran because he grew a couple of harmless plants in his basement. If you value your life, or your families well being,
Just a suggestion

Anonymous said...

A White House spokesperson said the President only answered questions he was posed? 18 of the top 20 questions were about reforming U.S. drug policy! None of them were posed?! Google - Did you pose these questions?! If not - WHY would you have wasted everyone's time that voted for these?!

Anonymous said...

The "War on Drugs" is looking more like a diversion to keep law enforcement at all levels busy while the elites loot the treasury.

Anonymous said...

Well re: your comment about keeping these things in mind at election...its not something that would tip the balance for me towards voting for Romney. I cant imagine he would be any more engaged or pro-active, but rather a return to the typical conservative rhetoric about "gateway drug" and prohibition etc. Actually he's already said he is anti-legalization for medical pot. Even if he were to perform one of his patented Shape-shifter moves somewhere to someone, I still could never see it happening.

Romney is candid and clear about his prohibitionist attitude. Obama maybe ignores it, but he isnt actively fighting it either...

Where is William F Buckley when you need him...??

End of the day,it will be a progressive sea change and no president or "establishment" law enforcement etc. will stop it if the tipping point comes (i.e. enlightenment prevails, albeit unnecessarily late). The votes in Washington, Colorado and Oregon etc. could go a way towards that tipping point. But as is pointed out, its not a given that legalization would annoy the latin american countries...they would probably welcome it.

The tipping point may actually come because it is all the medicinal arguments PLUS the economic imperative/opportunity PLUS the large social acceptance of pot (incl. among non-tokers who at least recognize the hypocrisy when considering the impacts of what is in fact legalized i.e. booze and tobacco, and what is seriously harmful but largely uncontrolled (sugars, trans-fats etc.)

W.C. Varones said...


Who said anything about Romney?

You have a choice: Gary Johnson.

Don't waste your vote on Tweedledee or Tweedledum.