cannabisnews.com: Obama's Positions On Important Issues Has Changed










  Obama's Positions On Important Issues Has Changed

Posted by CN Staff on January 31, 2008 at 08:34:10 PT
By Linda Young, AHN Editor 
Source: AHN  

Washington, DC -- Presidential candidate Barak Obama (D-IL) has objected to rival Hillary Rodham Clinton's (D-NY) assertions that he has changed his position on some issues over the years and maintained that he hasn't done that. However, videotape of candidate debates from his campaign for the U.S. Senate in 2004 reveal that the senator from Illinois has changed his position on at least a half-dozen issues.
The Washington Times newspaper obtained and watched videotapes of the candidate debates during Obama's successful run for the U.S. Senate seat four years ago and it reported Thursday on the numerous instances where Obama's stand then differs from his stand now. One instance of Obama changing his position was his stand on whether using and possessing marijuana should be a crime. He has been enormously popular in California, where college professors and students are drawn to his opposition of medical marijuana raids. California laws conflict with federal law and allow medicinal marijuana use by patients when prescribed by a doctor as a treatment for a disease or health problem. That position and others drew a large crowd for Obama Wednesday night at a "Faculty for Obama" rally at California's Stanford University. However, it turns out that Obama favors more than just upholding California law on medicinal marijuana use. He stands alone among the presidential candidates of either party in supporting changing federal laws that criminalize marijuana, despite indicating that he supported those laws last fall. During a presidential debate last fall, Obama raised his hand when the candidates were asked if they favored keeping marijuana use illegal.However, according to the Times, during a 2004 debate, Obama said he was in favor of eliminating criminal penalties for possession or use of marijuana. The Times reports that it asked Obama's campaign about the conflicting stands. It further reports that the campaign initially tried to dodge the question and then finally confirmed that Obama had always favored decriminalizing marijuana and that Obama had mistakenly raised his hand as being opposed to decriminalizing marijuana during the presidential debate. That makes Obama the only candidate to support decriminalizing marijuana. According to the Times, the other changes in Obama's stands on issues over the past four years range from ending the embargo against Cuba to providing health care for illegal immigrants. More of Obama's half-dozen policy shifts will be detailed by the newspaper on Friday, the Washington Times said. The last Democratic debate before the Super Tuesday primaries is scheduled for Thursday night.Complete Title: 2004 Videotapes Show Obama's Positions On Important Issues Has ChangedSource: AHN (DC)Author: Linda Young, AHN EditorPublished: January 31, 2008 Copyright: 2008 AHN Media Corp Contact: newsdesk allheadlinenews.comWebsite: http://www.allheadlinenews.com/Related Article: Obama: Decriminalize Pothttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread23646.shtml

Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help





Comment #44 posted by paulpeterson on February 02, 2008 at 10:58:31 PT
fight 4 freedom & rchandar
Don't get me wrong-I wouldn't mind holding the doobie and throwing the football around the room, while watching millions watching professionals throw their weight around an arena. Just not in Storm Lake, Iowa, where goonish cops are getting caught red handed with evidence crimes blowing up in their faces like dye packs after an ATM heist.They would be only too happy to be able to shift some "liability" my way for a change.You see, they all have "Conservative Affective Disorder" (CAD-brains), which just can't change their minds. Marijuana helps, I think, to allow people to hold two opposing viewpoints in view at one time.In other words, I think I could juggle a hot potato like the football, at the same time I keep the flame burning without bogarting that other flaming banana (even though it's been a long time since I held both firmly in my mitts at the same time). Channel surfing? No problem-juggling all three is easy, since some things YOU JUST NEVER FORGET HOW TO DO IN TANDEM, EH?And that is just the point here. I am confident that since Obama kept those torch-tapping brain cells well lubricated at an earlier time in his life, I am just sure he won't forget justice when he lifts that long-bomb hand and places it on a sacred cow book, to take an oath to do the right thing, and we all are long-bombing for the best man to get where he can then catch that puppy and also run it in for a TD, to the din of applause from millions that will block our darnest to get those goons out of the way so we can all mob the goal-post and tear down that dungeon of doom some people call the "Bush Administration" (GOOD RUNON SENTENCE, EH?). PAUL PETERSON "What's in your wallet?" 
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #43 posted by FoM on February 01, 2008 at 16:28:44 PT
rchandar 
Thank you.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #42 posted by rchandar on February 01, 2008 at 16:06:32 PT:
paulpeterson
yes, i too think we have to be careful when judging Obama on this one. Our decrim/legalization: does it jibe with international policy, and the much-hated and ridiculous "certification" program that keeps MJ a prosecutable offence in drug-producing countries? I hate to sound like the party-spoiler, but the USA is not the primary MJ producer in the world, and we have to start thinking about reforming world policy, not just our policy. In fact, the people in other countries need our understanding more than our people do. The Oval Office is a powerful stage for reforming drug policy. I would say, let's not spend all our time extracting a promise before an election. Let's ELECT this guy because he's a promising voice, then present our case early in the Presidency when he's doing the inevitable coalition-building work. I trust Obama's motives; I don't think he will be a Bill Clinton.--rchandar
[ Post Comment ]

 


Comment #41 posted by fight_4_freedom on January 31, 2008 at 19:56:01 PT:

I totally agree with RonPaul
on drug policy. And I even voted for him (since I was left with only the republicans to vote for). But he has no chance anymore. I'm glad he's still fighting, spreading his message. But what he believes just doesn't matter in this election unfortunately. They won't even let him finish half of his sentences during debates. I wish he would get more publicity, but the media just doesn't want the people to hear the truth.
[ Post Comment ]




 


Comment #38 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 19:32:49 PT

Dankhank
I believe that who we associate with is important. I find myself getting depressed when I hear ba humbugs all the time. When someone is up and hopeful soon I begin to feel that way. Shiny Happy People make life good and positive. That is energizing and I know it is much healthier to have hope then despair. A glass half full is a good thing to me.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #37 posted by Truth on January 31, 2008 at 19:31:45 PT

Dr. Paul
Google "Ron Paul" and watch a couple of his speaches on the vidios. This man is by far the best canidate.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #36 posted by Dankhank on January 31, 2008 at 19:13:39 PT

SHP ...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiny_Happy_People
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #35 posted by Dankhank on January 31, 2008 at 19:10:49 PT

Shiny Happy People ...
are truly the best kinda people ...Would that we all could be so ...Isn't that the chick from the B-52's in that tarty red dress ... PS like it ...This is a sixties song from the eighties ... eighties in thought ... sixties in mind liked it every time I heard it ...
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #34 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 16:02:25 PT

RevRayGreen 
I hope your question gets asked.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #33 posted by fight_4_freedom on January 31, 2008 at 15:59:20 PT:

By the way
Good question Rev!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #32 posted by fight_4_freedom on January 31, 2008 at 15:58:41 PT:

I voted for a decriminalization
question earlier on so I can't vote for yours. Let's just hope we get at least one cannabis question aired tonight. I think there's a good chance they will mention something about decriminalization. 1. It's in California2. Today's news about Obama's stance on it I'll be waiting and watching.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #31 posted by RevRayGreen on January 31, 2008 at 15:48:44 PT

Hope my question gets asked tonight
http://dyn.politico.com/debate/democrats/VoteForQuestion.cfm#Question on: Social Issues 
As a Mulitple Sclerosis patient diagnosed in 2004, I have discovered that my medicine is marijuana. The truth about marijuana is better than the lies handed down from generation to generation. Will you tell the truth about marijuana and provide those living with MS,AIDS,Cancer, Arthritis etc. legal state protection from the DEA ? As well as move cannabis to a SCHEDULE II drug so my Doctor can prescribe it LEGALLY.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #30 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 13:05:34 PT

dongenero
Prohibitionists do see things differently but the way I feel is we grow and change our thinking as we get older and become more tolerant or at least to have a good country we should. A country for all types of people would be wonderful.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #29 posted by dongenero on January 31, 2008 at 12:50:29 PT

I agree FoM
It would simply be nice to not have your hard earned assets taken and your livelihood ruined by your own government because you are in possession of a plant or a few flowers.Seems pretty reasonable. Unfortunately, prohibitionists are not reasonable people. They are black or white thinkers, no gray area. Prohibitionists' and alcoholics' minds share that deficiency. 
 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #28 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 12:35:57 PT

Hope
I really like the people that post on Obama's blog. I feel right at home with those shiny, happy people.R.E.M. - Shiny Happy People http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbGSDkvh8B0
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #27 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 12:13:50 PT

Decriminalizing Marijuana
I know people really want to hear the word legalize but what decriminalizing Marijuana means is a line gets drawn in the sand. I think of it like firemen making a fireline to stop a runaway fire. When the fire is stopped more can be done. It is what Amsterdam has done. Decriminalization is the first step and that is all I ever wanted to see is one little step towards change. It would take the sting out in states that don't have good marijuana laws too. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #26 posted by Hope on January 31, 2008 at 12:13:06 PT

Working on a campaign
I haven't actually worked on a campaign since I was a teenager, but I might actually see if I can do something for this one. It's so exciting. A main stream candidate! It's so wonderful.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #25 posted by Hope on January 31, 2008 at 12:08:27 PT

Finding where to stand and standing...
Somebody quoted A. Lincoln somewhere, maybe here, yesterday about "Choosing where to place your feet, placing them carefully and then standing firm".I've chosen. I'm standing!Hooray! Hooray! Hooray!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #24 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 12:07:05 PT

Hope
I will work for his campaign this summer if he wins the nomination and I never thought of doing such a thing ever.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #23 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 12:05:43 PT

Hope
I couldn't be happier. He has such a good spirit about him. Common sense comes when reason is used and then growth comes. There is no such thing as false hope either!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #22 posted by Hope on January 31, 2008 at 12:04:19 PT

Comment 20 FoM
"We are looking at the next President of The United States of America."Oh, I hope so. I so hope so.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #21 posted by Hope on January 31, 2008 at 12:01:44 PT

This is just wonderful news.
Wonderful news. How glorious. No "lesser of two evils" this time! Someone I can really feel good about voting for. Hallelujah!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #20 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 11:59:29 PT

Hope
When I first saw the article I stopped and read it to Stick and didn't move for a few moments. I know in my heart that he will do a great job. My sister, The Republican, called me during Senator Kennedy's endorsement and what she said blew me away. She said we are looking at the next President of The United States of America and I cried.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #19 posted by Hope on January 31, 2008 at 11:53:46 PT

I'm so happy about this...
I could just about weep for joy.Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #18 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 11:53:14 PT

Hey Back
I agree with you. Something very special is happening. I honestly never get tired of listening to him because he seems so in tune.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #17 posted by Hope on January 31, 2008 at 11:50:07 PT

Hey
There's a hideous blight, at this moment, on the face of Lady Liberty. I'm going to vote for the person who is truly wanting to alleviate that blight.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #16 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 11:47:24 PT

augustwest 
I actually am seeing a small light at the end of the tunnel. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #15 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 11:43:43 PT

Hope
My goodness dear friend you made my day!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #14 posted by augustwest on January 31, 2008 at 11:40:02 PT:

times = moonies
i grew up in the dc area & my first job was selling subscriptions to the wash. times i had countless doors slammed in my face as well as profanities shouted at an 
8yr old. i found out later this paper is owned by the rev. 
sun young moon a ultra conservative korean cult leader.
i honestly don't know how they stayed in bussiness all these years but nobody i know in dc takes it seriously.
they obviously consider obama a threat and probably think his stance on cannabis will hurt him. i think it will help
get elected pres. this is great news especially with his past i used to think he would come out against legalization because of his prior drug use.this is real change.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #13 posted by Hope on January 31, 2008 at 11:34:03 PT

Changing your position on matters over time...
It means a person is capable of thought and reason. Can you imagine if you were never allowed to change your mind or have a better understanding about something than you did before?What are you supposed to do? If you take a stand on something and realize that you have better understanding and know better than what you did originally are you supposed to stubbornly and stupidly cling to the original stance?No! It's called growing and getting smarter.What about racists? Can't they ever decide not to be? Do they have to continue being racist because they were once?I makes me angry they are trying to pull that idiotic "waffling" crap on Obama now. I guess those that do so, have to keep doing so... just because they're moronic about changing their minds and growing and having a better understanding.You get on the wrong road to Chicago... and you HAVE to stay on it just because someone else thinks you're wrong for getting on the right road?Ignorance is so disgusting. Obama for President! 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #12 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 11:11:33 PT

Paul
How I look at Senator Obama is how he deals with issues that are important to me. He is a reasonable, common sense type man so I know in time if he wins he will do what is right.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #11 posted by fight_4_freedom on January 31, 2008 at 10:39:11 PT:

Paul
Doin the doobie thing while playing some pigskin or even watching makes for an exciting time, you should give it a try. I'm going to combine both activities this Sunday :)
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #10 posted by paulpeterson on January 31, 2008 at 10:31:18 PT

Obama and marijuana decriminalization
Give this guy a break. sure, he raised his hand, when asked to support the status quo "illegality" of this herb. At that time, in that place, it would have been SUICIDE to not raise your hand. That was a demand for an "oversimplification" of what has to be a complex position.Sure, under some circumstances, "illegal conduct" can attach to marijuana, such as selling this to minors (just like selling booze to kids and cigarettes to anyone-got you there, didn't I?).But Obama has long been the candidate of choice here, and I don't mind him "hedging" his best in the most repressive of situations-like when millions of non-nuanced thinkers are watching on prime-time TV.Another way to look at this, is that WHATEVER FIRST STEP "CHANGES" ARE MADE, ARE INEVITABLY TO BE SEEN AS WRONG AND BAD AND INSUFFICIENT, AS SOON AS THE "PARADIGM" SHIFTS TO THAT FIRST STEP. However, we don't even get to "debate" the first step and furthers, UNTIL THAT FIRST STEP IS TAKEN.In other words, the very point that Obama seems to be making, that we need to take a first step, inevitably means he will be seen as "waffling" when merely simplistic reactionary knee jerk reaction "CAD" (Conservative Affective Disorder) brains are engaged in dialogue.I'm just glad that Edwards stomped off the scene, and left the field, and that means Obama will certainly see a "surge" at the polls, right in time for the "Super Tuesday" events, that will overshadow the "Superbowl" in my opinion, but of course, I ain't a football dude, I'de rather do the doobie thing than kick around some rawhide (but of course, it's been a long time, folks, since I'm stuck in Northwest, Iowa, fighting to gain evidence of criminal assaults by local ROGUE COPS that think they can conceal evidence, merely because they think I do doobies all the time, if that makes sense here.Nope, nobody catches me with doobie on my breath (but I know a few good cops that would love to goon me against good there, eh?) PAUL PETERSON
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #9 posted by fight_4_freedom on January 31, 2008 at 10:26:17 PT:

Brattleboro Reformer
Pros, cons of pot bill debated
By PAUL H. HEINTZ, Reformer StaffThursday, January 31
MONTPELIER -- A Windsor County state's attorney whose handling of a marijuana possession case drew controversy last year told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee he agrees with a proposal to decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana.The state's attorney, Robert Sand, also presented his own revisions to the bill, including a suggestion to simply confiscate and destroy marijuana found in some cases without further repercussion. 
Full Article- You can leave comments without registering
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #8 posted by fight_4_freedom on January 31, 2008 at 10:16:10 PT:

This is where it gets stupid
Sand noted that part of his proposal would also rewrite the state's driving under the influence laws to allow for the arrest of a person who has THC – the intoxicating substance found in marijuana – in their system while driving."If you choose to use and you drive with THC in your system, you should face a DUI," he said.Don't these idiots understand just because you have THC in your system, doesn't mean you are under the influence. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #7 posted by fight_4_freedom on January 31, 2008 at 10:09:13 PT:

Rutland Herald Article on Decrim.
http://tinyurl.com/2x6bowPot law reform gets day in SenateJanuary 31, 2008By DANIEL BARLOW Vermont Press BureauMONTPELIER — The Windsor County prosecutor who shook up the drug policy conversation in Vermont last year took his case to the Statehouse on Wednesday.State's Attorney Robert Sand told members of the Senate Judiciary Committee that it is poor public policy to brand all Vermonters who use a small amount of marijuana as criminals, as the law now does.Instead, Sand proposed a four-tiered system for marijuana possession that would focus on issuing civil tickets to people arrested for the first time with small amounts of the plant. This would ease the burden that marijuana arrests have placed on law enforcement and the courts, he added."To respond to the lowest end of the marijuana cases, it is estimated that it takes two hours of police work," Sand told the lawmakers, who are considering a bill that would decriminalize small amounts of the plant. "What happens in our communities during those two hours that the officer is pulled off the streets?"Sand made headlines last year when he declared that Vermont's approach to marijuana was not working and that the drug should be decriminalized. Nearly 100 people turned out to the Statehouse last week to speak on that issue, most of them supportive of Sand's approach.When speaking to the five members of the Judiciary Committee on Wednesday, Sand said the public opinion is now on his side on the marijuana issue."There is probably no other criminal law that a significant portion of the population thinks shouldn't exist," he said.The bill before the Judiciary Committee would decriminalize the possession of small amounts of marijuana. Instead of being arrested and facing the charges in court, most people found with small amounts of the plant would receive a ticket of up to $1,000 and have their marijuana confiscated and destroyed by police.That bill in its current form also decriminalizes the sale of small amounts of marijuana, but that provision is likely to be stripped if the Judiciary Committee continues work on the legislation. That portion of the bill had Sen. Kevin Mullin, R-Rutland, remark that it "doesn't pass the laugh test."But Sand's proposal is a bit different. He recommended creating a four-tiered approach to marijuana with penalties that increase depending on the amount of the plant involved. For example, one ounce of marijuana would result in only the plant being confiscated and destroyed.Civil tickets coupled with court diversion would kick in for two ounces, and possession of larger amounts would result in misdemeanor or felony charges. Sand told the committee that the amounts he used in his proposal are flexible, but added that other states that have decriminalized the plant have gone up to 3.5 ounces."Twelve other states have figured it out," Sand said. "I think Vermont can figure it out as well."Decriminalization of marijuana is opposed by many in the law enforcement community, according to Steve McQueen, the Winooski Police chief who was representing the Vermont Police Association before the committee Wednesday."Our position is to leave the law the way it is," he said.The problem with decriminalizing marijuana is that those who use the plant would still get it from the illegal market, putting them in danger and continuing to benefit the illegal drug trade, McQueen said.Instead, he suggested that the state focus on changing people's behaviors with an eye to decreasing marijuana use. He added that the burden on local police shouldn't be an issue in this drug debate."Don't look to make it easier for us," he told the committee. "Don't bring that into the discussion."Lawmakers had some tough questions for Sand during his testimony Wednesday, including if decriminalizing the plant would send the wrong message to Vermont's youth and how to handle people who may driving under the influence of marijuana."We are trying to tell kids not to use alcohol," said Sen. Richard Sears, D-Bennington, the chair of the committee. "Are we now sending a message that marijuana is OK?"Sand said he would never bring forward his proposal if he thought it would harm public safety. But a recent state survey showed that 55 percent of high school seniors have smoked marijuana compared to 44 percent who have smoked a cigarette. Education, treatment and prevention will stop marijuana use from increasing, he said."In the states and countries that have decriminalized, they have not seen increases in use," he said.Sand noted that part of his proposal would also rewrite the state's driving under the influence laws to allow for the arrest of a person who has THC – the intoxicating substance found in marijuana – in their system while driving."If you choose to use and you drive with THC in your system, you should face a DUI," he said.Contact Daniel Barlow at Daniel.Barlow rutlandherald.com.I really hope they talk about this tonight. Then maybe it will lead into a little more discussion about the medical issue as well. I know, I'm a dreamer :)

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #6 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 10:02:13 PT

Huffington Post: Obama: Decriminalize Pot

  January 31, 2008 
Last fall during a nationally televised presidential debate, Sen. Barack Obama hesitantly raised his hand and joined with most of his Democratic rivals to declare that he opposed decriminalizing marijuana.But as a candidate for the U.S. Senate four years ago, Mr. Obama told Illinois college students that he supported eliminating criminal penalties for marijuana use or possession, according to a videotape of a little noticed debate that was obtained by The Washington Times.Asked about the two different answers, Mr. Obama's presidential campaign said he in fact has "always" supported decriminalizing marijuana as he answered in 2004, meaning the candidate mistakenly raised his hand during the presidential debate last fall.Copyright: 2008 HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/01/31/obama-decriminalize-pot_n_84277.html
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #5 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 09:01:54 PT

Sam
I knew he wasn't against decriminalizing marijuana when he raised his hand. He looked like he wanted to say something on the topic and then they changed questions before they got to him. I bet it will be brought up tonight now. Since Clinton has gotten bad press on Unions this could be very interesting.Clinton Remained Silent As Wal-Mart Fought UnionsTapes Reviewed by ABC News Show Clinton As a Loyal Company Womanhttp://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/comments?type=story&id=4218509

[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #4 posted by Sam Adams on January 31, 2008 at 08:47:44 PT

Times et al
This is really encouraging also - it appears these right-wingers are starting to wake up to the fact that it might be Obama they have to defeat, not Clinton.I so hope the Dems wake up and smell the coffee. They need to GET OUT THE VOTE more than anything else, and that is what Obama can do. Look at the massive turnout and enthusiasm of black voters in SC. Look at the turnout & enthusiasm of young people for Obama. These are two groups of people that don't vote, because the Dems have ignored & exploited them for the last 30 years. The Dems figure they can dump all over the black people because hey, they're not going to vote Republican, are they? But what happens is that they don't vote at all, and then the Republicans win the South every time. Obama can reverse that.  YES talk about decrim, maybe someone stoners and students will actually vote.Mostly I just want a Dem that can win and the damn Republicans out of there!
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #3 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 08:45:59 PT

Sam
I think they meant the ones that are leading. 
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #2 posted by Sam Adams on January 31, 2008 at 08:43:47 PT

they got it WRONG
Obama is the only candidate to support decrim? What have they been smoking! What about Gravel, Kucinich, Dodd, and Ron Paul? Idiots.
[ Post Comment ]


 


Comment #1 posted by FoM on January 31, 2008 at 08:35:27 PT

I Always Thought This
Excerpt: The Times reports that it asked Obama's campaign about the conflicting stands. It further reports that the campaign initially tried to dodge the question and then finally confirmed that Obama had always favored decriminalizing marijuana and that Obama had mistakenly raised his hand as being opposed to decriminalizing marijuana during the presidential debate. 
[ Post Comment ]





  Post Comment