cannabisnews.com: Obama Admn Promotes a Broader Conversation Obama Admn Promotes a Broader Conversation Posted by CN Staff on January 23, 2009 at 16:11:18 PT By Neal Peirce, Syndicated Columnist Source: Seattle Times Washington, DC -- Big breaking news on the cyber-politics front: The Obama transition Web site — Change.gov — has been renamed WhiteHouse.gov and started operations. With a heartening message from Macon Phillips, the director of new media for the White House:"President Obama started his career as a community organizer on the South Side of Chicago, where he saw firsthand what people can do when they come together for a common cause. Citizen participation will be a priority for the administration, and the Internet will play an important role in that." And Congress has an open invitation to join the act. YouTube, which began airing Barack Obama's weekly messages right after his election, is now creating two special congressional Web pages, one for senators, another for representatives.The federal lawmakers will be invited to post videos with their remarks on topics of their choosing, inviting constituents to respond with questions and comments.And now there's even competition on the move to Internet-era governance. The progressive social action Web site Change.org has seized on an early Obama idea: Grass-roots Americans should be able to generate fresh ideas that officialdom needs to hear.Four days before the inauguration, Change.org (which actually preceded Obama's Change.gov site by two years) released results of its own Internet survey. More than 658,000 votes were cast to select 10 favorite ideas (out of 7,800 submitted) that participants believed the new administration should consider.Conducted jointly with MySpace, the 10 top ideas have a distinctly leftward tilt — repeal of the USA Patriot Act, legalizing same-sex marriage, free universal health care, labeling all food containing genetically engineered ingredients, and higher education for all students.But one recommendation favored small business, classically defended by conservatives: to exempt small American toymakers from the expensive, extended testing of their products for children that Congress required last year in response to lead-tainted playthings imported from China.And like early polling on Obama's own Change.gov site, major reform of drug laws — including a halt to arrests for medical or recreational use of marijuana — garnered some of the highest votes. Obama's transition team responded by saying he opposes legalization of marijuana. But this is one issue where the public is jumping ahead of our new leader.Which is precisely the opportunity that Web democracy brings: It lets the public both pose and vote on controversial issues that political leaders would just as soon ignore.Which raises a new possibility: Could a deliberative national process involve more people — not just registering their votes on issues, but helping to frame issues and solutions? That's the plan of three organizations — AmericaSpeaks, Demos, and Everyday Democracy — in a recent report on strengthening U.S. democracy.The idea is to have our new president "call for regular national discussions of 1 million Americans or more on the issues of highest public concern, like foreign policy, energy, taxes, health care, and jobs." There would be a White House Office of Citizen Engagement to organize the process, together with a nonpartisan working group of citizens appointed by the majority and minority leadership of Congress.Americans could participate several ways — by conversations in homes, workplaces or community centers, by participating in national town meetings linked by satellite, or in small groups "meeting" online in "virtual" discussion space before registering their priorities.The idea is to create a truly serious nationwide discussion process. There would be skilled facilitators, and participants would receive "balanced, accessible educational materials to ensure that everyone begins with adequate context to come to informed judgments."Wow! Not just opinions, but judgments based on clear, objective information? What a radical idea.The recommendations couldn't disappear into a black hole — Congress would be required to hold hearings to address them, and the president to issue a written response. Media would then treat the dialogue-and-report process as major news.Imagine if there'd been such a process shortly after the 9/11 attacks. Or now on the future fiscal issues in Medicare and Social Security. Or on truly tough-to-settle issues, like correcting America's world-leading prison population levels. The power of special-interest lobbies to dominate hearings or to distort public debate with misleading advertising would likely be dealt a major blow.The idea sounds like an Obama natural. But why couldn't forward-looking members of Congress, kicking the traces of lobbyist influence, take a lead in advocating it?As this inventive citizen consultative process gained momentum at the national level, it could also be tried out on state, regional or city levels — again addressing crucial issues and favoring the citizenry over moneyed lobbies in an unprecedented way.The change we've been waiting for? I think so.Neal Peirce's column appears regularly on editorial pages of The Times. His e-mail address is: nrp citistates.comCopyright: 2009 Washington Post Writers GroupComplete Title: Obama Administration Promotes a Broader National ConversationSource: Seattle Times (WA)Author: Neal Peirce, Syndicated ColumnistPublished: Friday, January 23, 2009Copyright: 2009 The Seattle Times CompanyContact: opinion seatimes.comWebsite: http://www.seattletimes.com/URL: http://preview.tinyurl.com/d97hjnRelated Articles:Obama's Marijuana Prohibition Acid Testhttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24426.shtml Obama Must Keep Marijuana Promisehttp://cannabisnews.com/news/thread24327.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #41 posted by Hope on January 31, 2009 at 21:50:10 PT Apology accepted. Skepticism is healthy, I think. Skepticism and hope? You have to know that nothing is impossible. I've even hoped for miracles... pure miracles. Since I believe I've seen and experienced them... it's easier for me to hope than it used to be. Lot's of times they, the miracles I needed, didn't appear. Not, at least, as I hoped they would. That's life. Sometimes it's amazing good. Sometimes it's not.Anyone know if cops still cuss people like they used to in their home invasions? Have they sensed public displeasure on that and pulled back or are they still vile as vile... still? I haven't heard as much about that lately as I used to. [ Post Comment ] Comment #40 posted by Antgrass on January 31, 2009 at 21:30:38 PT My Apologies.. Sorry if my first post sounded a slight bit scathing. I certainly didn't mean to sound condescending. I understand that a fraction of a chance is better than none, and there's nothing wrong with you good folks holding out hope, that the new president isn't like the others. I am very skeptical, and I can't believe these disgusting raids are continuing. If Obama isn't a complete liar and scumbag, he will call off the SS(err I mean DEA), and soon. I'm sure our country doesn't quite have the funds available to be persecuting the sick right now. [ Post Comment ] Comment #39 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 23:05:03 PT And ANTGrass... Welcome to C-News. [ Post Comment ] Comment #38 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 21:53:00 PT I'm sorry about your niece. I know she is your sister's child, named after you. I'm so sorry. [ Post Comment ] Comment #37 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 18:23:15 PT Hope We have a worldly wise young President and many of the Democrats I have seen seem to know the world is bigger and more diverse then we have been allowed to be as a society for years. They will see the money isn't worth it because it just isn't worth it. PS: I just got a sad phone call from my sister. My niece now has adrenal cancer and is Stage 4. I've been talking to my niece more frequently lately and I'll keep up the calls. [ Post Comment ] Comment #36 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 17:41:40 PT "in low these many years" I laughed at myself when I said that. That could have a lot read into it and still be true. I meant it like "Lo"... as in "Look at this. This is not insignificant" as in "HelLO, too". and "Low" as opposed to "High". And now, maybe I mean in low gear, too.Was it John Paul Jones that said once in the heat of a sea battle, "We have not yet begun to fight"?We have been "in low, these many years". There's power in low gear in this terrible mud pit we slog through around this issue. Maybe, there's a possibility we have not yet hit high gear people.Do we give up yet?We have not yet shifted into high gear. We're getting closer and closer to that point. We have some firmer ground shaping up under our wheels than we've seen in a long time. If nothing else, just like Kap has always said it would go down, because the prohibitionists are going to find many, many people not so willing to waste so much money on their prohibitionist obsessions that lead to no good for anyone at all except for them and the black market they foster. [ Post Comment ] Comment #35 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 16:50:31 PT Hope You really said that very well. I live in my own world of lowered expectations. That attitude has come with life's experiences for me. If I believe more then I should if it doesn't go the way I hoped I am sad. If I expect little I appreciate everything that comes my way and then I am happy. [ Post Comment ] Comment #34 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 16:47:28 PT "Come on, Baby...Light my fire" :0)And yes, keep a stiff upper lip, and all that, even when you feel like crying... or screaming. I know, sometimes we have to cry. And keep on being as civil as possible even though you'd like to beat the prohibitionists with your fists.Be strong. Why would I tell you to be weak? And having a shred of hope isn't being weak. None of us would have ever shown up at this place, or ever said a word, if we didn't have some shred of hope.And ANTGrass, we had a friend and very hard working activist for reform who had a perfectly delightful and happy name that posted here for years. She lost her last shred of hope and and we've lost her.Any little hope that exists here is real. Instead of putting it down and belittling it ... be amazed, warm yourself at it, and be strengthened by it, if you can. [ Post Comment ] Comment #33 posted by Hope on January 30, 2009 at 16:10:06 PT ANTGrass No bubbles burst. Don't worry about us being too optimistic. And certainly don't worry about any disappointment you fear we'd be awfully surprised at. We've learned, in low these many years, to wade through and walk on the deepest of disappointments. We've seen our friends here pass on. We've seen some of us dragged off to prison. We've all seen ridicule and grief and sorrow. We know them well.There is no "False" hope, just as there is no "False" joy. Hope can't be false. It only is what it is. Hope. It's sort of an element of faith, perhaps. Faith, perhaps is a greater hope than just plain hope. Haven't seen anyone on here say "I have faith that the new administration of government will end it's persecution of people who so very muchly do not deserve that persecution"... have you? Probably not. Some have dared express hope that "Maybe"... "Hopefully... Sometime"..."Maybe". Most of all "We KNOW, all too well, my friend, that it's "NOT LIKELY" staring us back in the face from the prohibitionists eyes. But you have seen "Maybe... someday... somehow". As FoM said on this or another thread... 'don't be reading stuff into what we say'. Just what we say is usually, if not always, what we're trying to say.We try to encourage each other here to keep on standing up. Keep on resisting. Keep on talking and typing into the wilderness. Stand up. Keep on. There's light ahead. Somewhere. I hope. For God's Sake. For humanity's sake.So fire up your bit of hope in this dark room of criminal injustice we're all in, and if you can't ... don't try to extinguish someone else's.We don't have much, if any, faith in any of these men and women who deign to be our "Representatives" in the government we have. We can have a bit of hope though. It's free. It's natural. It's good for the body and soul.I definitely think you're wrong about our level of hope being somehow dangerously high. We all know the distance to the bottom from wherever we are at all times, and we definitely know how hard it is to hit the bottom. We all know about realistic expectations as opposed to unrealistic expectations.We know about hope. We know how to handle it. When I chose it as my "New name" here one day, and I don't mean "False" name... I knew the word I was using and what it means.It may be dark as hell itself, but hope is a spark of light in that darkness. That's what hell really is... when there is no spark, no small, small, glimmer of hope.Now the opposite of hope... that's worry. I'll give you something to worry about if you'd rather. Try this. We're all, everyone of us who has dared speak out against our country's drug or cannabis policy, being written up on a major RICO somewhere. And don't think they wouldn't love to do it. The prohibitionists have an insatiable appetite for persecution and "re-educating" people. A computer is busy somewhere with a huge file of arrest warrants for people who dared disagree and conspire with each other to reform bad laws... that apparently some people think God wrote. And Darrel "DARE" Gates get to line up all the "Dopers", "Druggies", and "Potheads" and shoot them, and maybe he's hoping, like the sort of government he idolizes, he will get to charge their families for the bullets and sell their organs to people who have the money to pay for them. [ Post Comment ] Comment #32 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 12:30:14 PT OT: U.S. and Europe Split Over Drugs Policy January 30, 2009LONDON (Reuters) - U.N.- sponsored negotiations on a new global drugs strategy are close to breaking down, with profound divisions between Europe and the United States on key policy issues, participants at the talks in Vienna say.The problem is that U.S. negotiators are trying to push through anti-drug programmes that were promoted during the former Bush administration but which are no longer advocated by President Barack Obama, they said.URL: http://uk.reuters.com/article/UKNews1/idUKTRE50T3AK20090130 [ Post Comment ] Comment #31 posted by ANTgrass on January 30, 2009 at 11:41:11 PT Correction Duh, small correction.. What I meant to say is that Bush vowed to support medical marijuana use during his first run as president, as hard to believe as that is. [ Post Comment ] Comment #30 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 11:28:45 PT ANTGrass I don't think you are bursting anyone's bubble. I know it will take a long time for change to come but at least we have a small chance now. [ Post Comment ] Comment #29 posted by ANTGrass on January 30, 2009 at 11:13:21 PT Sorry to burst everyone's bubble.. Hello, everyone. As a longtime observer of your message boards, I have been a little puzzled by the trend of false hope many of you seem to have caught regarding our new President, so I thought I should post and point something out to everyone. Bush ALSO promised to end the raids during his first run at president, although no one on here seems to recall. Its NEVER going to happen. Obama, a former hard drug user(yuck), just like his predecessor(double yuck), will soon have his appointed lackey's telling us how bad of a "message" it would send to the children(who, by the way, are being innundated non-stop with hours of liquor, beer, and sex-aid commercials on their TV's)by allowing adults to use a plant in their own homes, without fear of arrest and imprisonment. Sure hope I am wrong.. [ Post Comment ] Comment #28 posted by FoM on January 30, 2009 at 10:24:33 PT OT: Dems Question U.S. Efforts Dems Question U.S. Efforts to Block Global AIDS-Prevention MeasureURL: http://washingtonindependent.com/28083/dems-question-us-efforts-to-block-global-aids-prevention-measure [ Post Comment ] Comment #27 posted by FoM on January 29, 2009 at 18:57:53 PT Related Article From The Los Angeles Times Civic Activists in L.A. Have Growing Appetite To Curb Medical Marijuana ClinicsJanuary 29, 2009URL: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-outthere30-2009jan30,0,2484619.story [ Post Comment ] Comment #26 posted by FoM on January 29, 2009 at 14:48:04 PT Related Article From The Miami Herald Medical Marijuana Raid Raises Question: What's Obama Policy?January 29, 2009URL: http://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics/AP/story/878783.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #25 posted by FoM on January 29, 2009 at 07:56:53 PT One More Comment When I say something I want people to hear what I say and not read anything into what I say. I think the answer he gave in Oregon is a talking point. What I mean is if he said:***Excerpt: I think there are legitimate concerns in not wanting to allow people to grow their own or start setting up mom and pop shops, because at that point it becomes fairly difficult to regulate.***I would ask how can people obtain medical marijuana that is allowed in certain states without someone growing it? [ Post Comment ] Comment #24 posted by FoM on January 29, 2009 at 05:03:52 PT Senator Barack Obama on Medical Marijuana Excerpt: Obama: When it comes to medical marijuana, I have more of a practical view than anything else. I mean, my attitude is that if it’s an issue of doctors prescribing medical marijuana as a treatment for glaucoma or as a cancer treatment, I think that should be appropriate because there really is no difference between that and a doctor prescribing morphine or anything else. I think there are legitimate concerns in not wanting to allow people to grow their own or start setting up mom and pop shops, because at that point it becomes fairly difficult to regulate. And again, I am not familiar with all the details of the initiative that was passed and what safeguards there were in place, but I think the basic concept that using medical marijuana in the same way with the same controls as other drugs prescribed by doctors, I think that’s entirely appropriate.http://granitestaters.com/candidates/video_obama_02.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #23 posted by FoM on January 29, 2009 at 04:35:02 PT A Big Question When I saw this article last night I was confused. I never heard Obama say anything about stopping raids on medical marijuana clubs. I hope someone will show me his words that said he would do this. ***Two Things Obama Could Do on Medical MarijuanaDebra J. SaundersThursday, January 29, 2009 During the campaign, President Obama said he would stop federal raids of medical marijuana clubs in states (like California) that had passed medical-marijuana laws.URL: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/01/28/EDL415IA6F.DTL [ Post Comment ] Comment #22 posted by Hope on January 28, 2009 at 22:39:48 PT Good work, Paul Armentano. Thank you. Hey, Mahakal. It's good to hear from you. [ Post Comment ] Comment #21 posted by FoM on January 28, 2009 at 19:25:07 PT Mahakal People should do whatever they think they should do. [ Post Comment ] Comment #20 posted by Mahakal on January 28, 2009 at 19:15:26 PT FoM I agree that we need to give Barack Obama time to deal with crises that cannot wait. That said, Paul Armentano's article is excellent and Obama needs to respond to our issue before too long. I think he can be a very successful president but he will need our help in four years and cannot afford to ignore us. [ Post Comment ] Comment #19 posted by FoM on January 28, 2009 at 05:35:34 PT Related Article from AlterNet Marijuana Reform Is Part of the Progressive AgendaBy Paul Armentano, AlterNetJanuary 28, 2009URL: http://www.alternet.org/rights/123133/ [ Post Comment ] Comment #18 posted by FoM on January 27, 2009 at 17:17:13 PT Mahakal My father was a Republican. He was an accountant and my mother was from a coal mine family and she was a Democrat. Both sides have their points. Politics weren't discussed in our family and maybe that's why I didn't pay any attention thru most of my life. Events in life can trigger political interest. I'm glad I don't have a long history of politics. Our work isn't done. We must change from the ground up I think. We are in shambles around this area. We watched a documentary on the Great Depression and we are going to go thru it again but at least we have some safeguards now. Spending stops. People don't trust the system and probably won't for years to come. Obama has a terrible job trying to clean up the mess that he inherited. I know our issue is important but I want him to be able to give drug policy a decent amount of attention and I don't think he can right now.This made me laugh. It's called Obama's first 100 minutes.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/27/obama-mad-magazine-cover_n_161326.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #17 posted by Mahakal on January 27, 2009 at 16:49:20 PT FoM My parents weren't liberal and neither was I except that I always wanted cannabis to be legal. I was actually a Libertarian for awhile, but that is what happens when you try to reconcile conservative upbringing with more respect for freedom, but without having a government that serves and protects you but rather one which persecutes people who are not hurting anyone.Anyhow being that everyone seems to be happy with Barack Obama so far maybe we'll make some good progress in the near future. It's not going to come from him, though -- we have to keep pushing this forward.Visualize whirled peas. [ Post Comment ] Comment #16 posted by FoM on January 26, 2009 at 16:20:48 PT OT: Liberal Parents, Liberal Children I thought this was an interesting off topic article.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/marty-kaplan/liberal-parents-liberal-c_b_161086.html [ Post Comment ] Comment #15 posted by FoM on January 26, 2009 at 10:46:25 PT Mahakal Thank you but I tend to disagree with you on the awesome comment. LOL! Thanks you very much though. [ Post Comment ] Comment #14 posted by Mahakal on January 26, 2009 at 10:26:28 PT FoM You're awesome, yourself. [ Post Comment ] Comment #13 posted by FoM on January 26, 2009 at 06:58:10 PT Mahakal I meant you. [ Post Comment ] Comment #12 posted by Mahakal on January 26, 2009 at 06:54:29 PT FoM If you mean me, thanks! :) [ Post Comment ] Comment #11 posted by Mahakal on January 26, 2009 at 06:52:35 PT BGreen I was thinking that it would be good if someone like Ethan Nadelmann could be drug czar but I don't know if he could be confirmed. Also, I don't think we need to reschedule everything at once, though the war on drugs policy has never worked with anything and it would be better to treat addiction as a health problem than a criminal matter regardless of the substance. Still, we know cannabis is safe and medically useful and the focus should be on rescheduling cannabis first.I don't use the old moniker much anymore; I was just going by Michael for a while but there are too many and it was confusing. I changed my Hebrew name (מיכאל) by one letter to create Mahakal (מהכאל). I like the combined reference.I don't know if I've discussed it publicly yet but my wife and I have split, and I have moved to a shared apartment in Berkeley next to the place where I do yoga and meditation. I'm hoping eventually to find or create a 420 meditation group that will be a starting point for establishing first amendment protections for cannabis. [ Post Comment ] Comment #10 posted by FoM on January 26, 2009 at 05:21:28 PT BGreen He's a good guy. [ Post Comment ] Comment #9 posted by BGreen on January 26, 2009 at 04:50:42 PT Dr. Jocelyn Elders would be PERFECT! She was slammed as Surgeon General for her forward thinking and pragmatism, and that, along with her qualifications as a Medical Doctor and not a retired Military General or politician makes her my choice for the next Drug Czar.I realize she is about 76-years-old and probably doesn't want to take on a job for four years, but a year or two and she could straighten things out and retire as a heroine. Then, they could eliminate the ONDCP and every other non-constitutionally mandated part of this government with so much authority as to name the person in charge after an Emperor of Russia, a King or an autocratic ruler. That in and of itself should red flag the legitimacy of an office in the US government run by such a person.********************Mahakal, my friend. It takes me a moment to associate the name with your former moniker. CA seems to have brought out the person trapped within you, much the same as my travels to Europe have done in my life. The only difference is I still have to exist amidst the mostly unenlightened and cultural-free here in Missouri.The Reverend Bud Green [ Post Comment ] Comment #8 posted by Mahakal on January 25, 2009 at 21:57:44 PT Obama "drug czar" Who do you think he should pick? [ Post Comment ] Comment #7 posted by E_Johnson on January 24, 2009 at 02:22:46 PT Ganjaman, your analogy is faulty They're not a dog. They're human beings who sin like all humans do. We don't have to "put them down." We just have to keep our faith in democracy and use democracy and make our voices heard. Look, I was around in the sixties. I've heard everything you're saying before in the context of different movements: the anti-Vietnam movement, the civil rights movement, the feminist movement and the gay rights movement.There's always someone saying, oh look, we have to resort to extremes because the system's fixed against us.But that person was always wrong, because change happened without going to extremes. It just happened naturally because it was right and people were ready.Eventually people will be ready. All this rough language and grandiose thinking is not going to make them ready any sooner.I know you think you're exciting, but to me you're pretty much of a been there a few times, heard that a few times, bore. [ Post Comment ] Comment #6 posted by Sinsemilla Jones on January 24, 2009 at 02:01:00 PT CNBC Marijuana Inc Poll - 97% to less than 3% favor marijuana decriminalization out of over 19,000 votes.Of the few hundred against mj decrim, not a single one posted their opinion.http://www.cnbc.com/id/28621704"**As of this posting, CNBC has only received comments favoring decriminalization of marijuana." [ Post Comment ] Comment #5 posted by CanadianGanjaman on January 24, 2009 at 00:41:38 PT haha sam adams.... You guys are aware that before we can completely remove the "zombie arm", it's going to give us the finger and seriously maim us previous to its death right...You think the DEA will stop just because there is a new mind running the white house? You think that Obama's word is not of folly when it pertains to the DEA? The lack of Bush will not stop them.. if anything it will cause them to increase raids previous to Obama actually getting a hold on the leash...Their last stand is afoot, the dog cornered is most ferocious.... Although an ignorant, biased, semi-retarded dog... its natural instincts remain intact...So i ask you... how do we put this dog down..... [ Post Comment ] Comment #4 posted by Sam Adams on January 23, 2009 at 20:57:20 PT DEA these raids remind me of a zombie movie where the arm is cut off and it keeps attacking and trying to choke the person [ Post Comment ] Comment #3 posted by FoM on January 23, 2009 at 18:04:22 PT ezrydn I think that raid had nothing to do with Obama. Bush's people are still in charge. It took almost 10 months (December 01) until Walters got his job as Drug Czar from the time George Bush became president in 2001. [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by ezrydn on January 23, 2009 at 17:57:07 PT: DEA Raid As a lead-in to Pete's story over at Drug WarRant: In case you missed it, the DEA conducted a raid yesterday on a medical marijuana dispensary in South Lake Tahoe, California. That's right - in the second full day of the new administration that had promised to end the raids.Keep in mind that Michele Leonhart is still head of the DEA. My gut instinct is that the DEA is acting on its own, ignoring Obama's campaign promises and pretending ignorance and business as usual, without anything concrete in place yet to deter them. It really shows the rank stupidity of the DEA leadership.How many times does Michele have to stab Obama in the back before he requires her resignation? To me, once would be enough! [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by FoM on January 23, 2009 at 16:13:38 PT Just a Comment I like this writer. He's written good articles before. This is way broader then our issue but drug policy and marijuana were in it so I thought I should post it. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment