The Pot Answer?

[RoyGBiv]

Really?

That's today's outrage?

Pot always made me mellow, so mellow I'd have been giggling manically with the very fact he even brought it up and acknowledged it with a wink and a nod. Then I would have liberated some peanut butter and syrup from the cabinet and moved on.

Tomorrow I'm posting a story that offers definitive proof Obama uses the over-the-top method for toilet paper rolls. Prepare your outrage now and avoid the rush.

[NYC_SKP]

1. Over the top method???

I don't think so.

That's crazy talk.

[RoyGBiv]

4. Just you wait ...

I have impeccable sources: three anonymous officials and two bloggers for analysis.

Lines will be drawn. This story will unravel the Internets.

[Cha]

2. And, so do

I! What of it?:P

[RoyGBiv]

7. Oh ...

You're one of *those* people.

I see how it is.

;-)

[Uzybone]

3. I heard he flushes the shit and then flushes the TP

instead of both at the same time. That outrages me.

[Brazenly Liberal]

5. That's right. I'm mad and I'm not going to take it any more!

Peanut butter and syrup??!!!???? You really should warn people when your post contains graphically inappropriate sandwich fillings. I was eating, fercryinoutloud!!!!! (herb-scented lima bean soup with toast)

[RoyGBiv]

6. I never mentioned bread ...

Only Freepers and corporatists and DLCers use bread. Are you one of those? Huh? HUH!? ARE YOU!?!?!? <points finger menacingly>

Just plain old peanut butter and syrup and a spoon. Sublime. What a real liberal would eat when high.

Add a pickle for zest.

:hide:

[Brazenly Liberal]

8. Hey, I don't have to take that kind of abuse.

Spoon? Really? Gah! I thought EVERYONE knew that the only appropriate post-doobie utensil is that engineering marvel, the spork. Get some etiquette, dude!

[RoyGBiv]

9. Sorry what was the question?

I've moved on to bacon and Velveeta now.

Just a big ol' hunk of Velveeta and some bacon.

Mmmmm ... bacon.

[winyanstaz]

25. Gaaackk

ewwwwwww :S

[RoyGBiv]

26. It's awesome ...

... especially with the pickle.

Ya know, seriously, this is one reason I quit smoking. I would wake up the next day with this horrible taste in my mouth from whatever my addled mind had decided sounded good the night before, leading me to wonder whether the benefit of a "no hangover" high was really all it was cracked up to be.

The munchies are hell, man.

:)

[babylonsister]

10. ROFL!

Perfect!

[Why Syzygy]

11. May I know

what was the Pot Answer? I get my news from you guys.

[RoyGBiv]

12. Serious answer ...

There was a question voted up on the Ask the President thing that was basically (I forget the exact wording) whether Obama thought legalizing marijuana should be considered as one aspect of addressing the economic situation.

His answer was "No."

What seems to have people in an uproar, at least those who are in an uproar for something resembling a rational reason, was not so much the answer but the way he answered. He addressed the question by not addressing it directly.

He basically made it a joke, saying something like, "I don't know what this question says about the people on the Internet, but ..." and then the "No." The room laughed, he laughed, and then he said a few other things about it of little consequence and moved on.

I would like to reiterate that he laughed and that the audience laughed. He didn't make it an issue of moral outrage. He didn't liken those who asked the question to the spawn of Satan. He didn't claim the fact the question was asked was a harbinger of the fall of society as a whole. He made it a joke, but not a mean joke. In short, he made it comfortable to everyone except to those with enormous Raovacs on their shoulders.

What's got me so tickled about this is the attitudes of a number of people that are all pissed off about it, people who are acting like what he *should* have done is gotten up there and either 1) made the entire forum one about drug laws or 2) said yessir, make the pot legal now. First it was being said that he would ignore it entirely. It was a fairly highly rated question, among the top 5 I think, but definitely the top 10. And people were already damning him by claiming he go against his own system and pretend the question was never asked. Well, that didn't happen, so then they didn't like the way he brought it up. There's no realistic way he could have answered that would have satisfied anyone who has a strong opinion on the issue either way.

My personal belief is that he addressed it in the only way he could given the circumstances. There may be an argument to be made for legalization and certainly one for decriminalization. Whether that question is relevant among other questions about the economy is iffy at best. The financial stress on law enforcement, the judicial system, and the prison system are certainly variables in our complex economic equation, but not enormous variables comparatively. Finally, as I think DUer underpants pointed out, his bringing it up at *all* was a wink and a nod to the stoner community the likes of which has not come from a President ever in a national forum. But if he'd done that in any other way, the entire message from the opposition would have been POT, POT, POT. Nothing else would have mattered at all. Or, he could have pointed out the benefits of legalization and taxes the hell out of it, and then it would have been TAX, TAX, TAX, POT, POT, POT all day and night for the next 4 years while nothing else ever gets done.

I was genuinely surprised he mentioned it because I was certain that's what the reaction would be given his potential realistic responses. But the fact he did is what is called "mainstreaming." Raise the subject, even as a joke, and at length what you end up with is an actual dialog. This is the kind of process our modern "I want it, and I want it NOW dammit" society can't deal with well, liberal, conservative, or any ideological position in between.

[walldude]

13. The question became relevant today when we handed Mexico

80 million dollars for Blackhawk helicopters to help fight the drug cartels. Which we basically created with our war on drugs. So now we spend more money we don't have fighting a war we can't win over a drug that will never go away. It's quite brilliant really.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/centralamericaandthecaribbean/mexico/5053823/US-buys-Mexico-helicopters-to-fight-drug-violence.html

[Why Syzygy]

15. I've wondered

what the result will be on the supply side. Not that I'm shopping. Know a lot of people who do.
Insanity... Doing the same thing ...

[RoyGBiv]

16. This is part of the problem ...

The "War on Drugs" is being conflated with asking whether marijuana (specifically, marijuana) legalization would help the economy.

Hear me now; understand me later.

I'm on your side with this issue and have been longer than a lot of the people ranting and raving about it have been aware there even was an issue. I've been on the proverbial front lines and damn near got myself kicked out of college and definitely harassed by police in my tiny hometown by being outspoken about it to the point of distributing agitation literature everywhere I could go that wouldn't immediately get me arrested. My letters to the editor of a certain newspaper are the stuff of legends, not for what they said, but for the uproar they caused in the community, in my personal life, and with my mother's employer.

I say all that in the hopes of being spared the speeches about why this is important.

Given all that though and to some extent because of it, I am fully cognizant of the fact that had the President of the United States stood there in this forum that many people, even among his so-called supporters, were calling a gimmick and laid the egg of marijuana legalization, what happened to Clinton would have been mere child's play.

And I have yet to see anyone who is so outraged even acknowledge the political difficulties involved, nor have I seen them express any understanding at all of the concept of the mainstreaming issues and the eventual effect that has on dealing with them in a progressive manner.

[walldude]

21. Well I have yet to see anyone truly "outraged"

I just see a lot of people who happen to disagree with Obama on this issue and are being taken to task for not marching in lock step. I see the difficulty politically on this issue but it's no worse than abortion or global warming or gay marriage or any other hot button issue.
The fact is counting fed, state and local expenditures, counting law enforcement, prisons and court systems the country would save about 100 billion dollars a year if they quit this useless war. That doesn't even begin to touch on the revenue possibilities and the drop in crime. I'm a huge Obama supporter but while his response might have been pragmatic it was dead wrong. He could have just as easily said "nothing is off the table" and let it go at that. It's not like he's going to score any points with the press or the cons anyway.

[RoyGBiv]

24. YMMV ...

"Outrage" is relative on DU.

This afternoon dozens of threads were posted all at once with your standard, snarky "corporatist" remarks (as though legalized marijuana wouldn't be quickly captured as a revenue stream by corporations) and the usual suspects coming along and once again regarding Obama as a non-Democrat or a failed President who isn't really on our side, ad nauseum.

Certainly the outrage doesn't reach the level of the circumcision debate, but then this is DU, and we have our standards.

As for your suggestion of "nothing is off the table," let me remind you of how we reacted to George Bush's use of that phrase in regard to the potential of engaging in a nuclear war with Iran. We, as a group, freaked right the hell out. Middle America (we won't even think about Freeper types) would react similarly, especially when Fox and CNN start telling them we have a pot-head President. Hell, just bringing it up at all gave all sorts of media outlets the excuse of reminding us all that he did in fact inhale.

You and I are not the people that need convincing here. This is the first President -- EVER -- who we even have a shot at hoping for a marginally more sane drug policy, and he's got about a hundred years or so of what is at its root racist, moralistic legislation and case law on the books, not to mention the deep, deep cultural indoctrination associated with that, to over come before he could even begin to get up before god and everyone and say "yes" or even something more benign as "nothing is off the table."

[Why Syzygy]

17. hmmm

I see your POV. I would like to see a video of that. Didn't all the questions come from "the people on the Internet"?

I can understand it not being part of his Economic Plan. That's what he's selling at this point. I do hope it results in more dialog, and eventually sane policy on the subject.

[RoyGBiv]

19. We need sane policy ...

We need a complete change on the way we deal with drug use, particularly recreational drug use of drugs as relatively harmless as pot.

That's not even on my radar of the reasons I find today's outrage so silly. Of course this needs to be addressed without the laughing or blithe dismissals.

But -- and I say this as someone who was very much the stoner at one point in his life, the kind of stoner who looked askance at those who used a pipe because they had no idea how to roll -- I find the reaction to that answer ludicrous. It's no more ludicrous than any of the other random outrages of the day and a bit less ludicrous than some, but COME ON! Rather than suggest these people are smoking a little too much, I'm going to suggest they aren't smoking enough, which is what my OP's "joke" was meant to convey. One doesn't get high and get all outrage-y. If that happens, you're doing it wrong.

[Why Syzygy]

20. The issue has a lot of momentum.

I'm pulling for the change. It's way over due, but all we can do is keep chipping away. I honestly thought of moving to New Mexico, mainly for access to MM. And I like Bill.

He called it the "online audience", and said, "No, I don't think that is a good idea to grow our economy".

He didn't say, "That's INCONCEIVABLE"!

[RoyGBiv]

22. Link ...

Here's the highly voted question:

I can't find the raw video. This is heavily edited and has too much talking-head commentary, but it gives the general gist.

It's at the end, and everything after the "No" is cut off.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sU8PrMlZBA

There were actually many questions about this among the highly voted ones, ranging from:

"Legalizing MARIJUANA would have *enormously* positive effects on the economy and would create millions of jobs. Alcohol is legal? It leads to much more violence than marijuana. Who has marijuana hurt? !!REFORM MR. OBAMA!!"

to the better:

"What are your plans for the failing, "War on Drugs", thats sucking money from tax payers and putting non-violent people in prison longer than the violent criminals?"

to the even better:

"President Obama, Do you plan on letting Science end the failed "War" on Marijuana for personal and medical use thus taking the strain of our prisons and police forces so that we no longer have to arrest over 800,000 non violent drug offenders?"

[lfairban]

14. Seriously?

Would it help you take the issue seriously if all the people who are in favor of legalization offered to suspend their contributions to political candidates until it is made legal?

[RoyGBiv]

18. I take the issue seriously ...

See my reply above.

[Hippo_Tron]

23. I'm not outraged, but not thrilled about the way Obama handled the question

I understand he doesn't support legalization. But I wish he would take the issue seriously rather than answering the question in a humorous tone.

[FrenchieCat]

27. I'm amazed that it was a top issue in terms of the question that got so many votes.

Is this really the top priority of the on-line community? legalizing Pot?

[Enthusiast]

28. Truth is

marijuana is such a big part of the economy that legalizing it would most likely have a negative impact. Marijuana value would plummet if legal. Profit would crash. People that profit from growing and selling marijuana would lose big time.

[donheld]

29. Does a president have to change the roll himself or

does he have people? :D

[RoyGBiv]

30. He has people ...

Ya know how it is.

Gotta get the outrage meter up there as high as possible, so his people talked to Mr. Whipple's people, and they got some other people to come in and be the roll people.

;-)

[MadLabrador]

31. Yeah, why should we be outraged at Obama's pathetic answer?

I mean, the drug war's never hurt anyone. Drugs are bad, and I can understand why Obama was so flippant about legalization; who cares about the millions of people sent to jail for smoking a harmless plant in their own home? Injustice is nothing to be outraged about!

btw in case you don't catch my sarcasm your question was a fucking insult

[RoyGBiv]

32. Making friends fast, I see ...

Your sarcasm isn't very good, btw.

[MadLabrador]

33. Did you see the shitty mess you left in your original post?

Something about a paper towel? Was that a joke? Cause it was funny in the same way a mouthful of diarrhea is funny.

[RoyGBiv]

34. Ummm ... yeah ...

I'm tempted just to say lighten up, Francis, but I think you're wound too tight for that, so I'll just say good day and leave you to your Internet rage.

Enjoy!

[MadLabrador]

35. Before you leave, can you just say this was a dumb post?

If you do, I promise to be 50% less enraged.

[RoyGBiv]

36. Now THAT ...

... was good sarcasm.

Seriously ... take a lesson from your avatar and chill.

[Norrin Radd]

37. I was mostly disturbed by the exuberant applause of the audience

to his answer of "no." Were they all staunch Nancy Reagan Just-Say-No-ers?

[RoyGBiv]

39. Probably not ...

You ever been around a bunch of really hard core anti-pot people? In my experience they never laugh. They don't know how.

[spiritual_gunfighter]

38. Your OP outs you

You would have been one of the ones in the audience chuckling at the idea of legalizing pot "tee hee hee, he said pot". First of all I dont smoke pot, and I have no intention of doing so even if it was legal. This question really isn't about people being able to get stoned legally when they want to. It is about the millions of people populating our nations jails and prisons over something as trivial as posession of weed. It is about the billions of dollars spent on a "war on drugs" that we will never win. It is about the person that chooses to not smoke marijuana and chooses instead to use a harder drug because in the case of a drug test marijuana shows up on a test for 6 to 8 weeks after use, and things like heroin and cocaine flushes out of your system after 24 to 48 hours. It is about the many uses of hemp which is also illegal although there is nothing in hemp that can get you high and was legal until the 40's in this country, we import hemp from Canada where it is legal because of this inane law and lose millions of dollars and jobs because of this. There are many reasons and yes you can also talk about how much of a boon it would be to our economy if you want to, and refrain from giggling and saying "heh heh the legalization people just want to lay on the couch and get high all day" Obama's reframing of the question which asked about the failed drug war not about how it will help the economy was frankly embarassing and beneath a President who I have a lot of respect for. And frankly this OP is embarassing as well.

[RoyGBiv]

40. Only if I were high ...

As for the OP being embarrassing ... you're embarrassed? I'm certainly not embarrassed. Why would you be embarrassed?