What We Might Expect From A Hillary Clinton Presidency

What We Might Expect form a Hillary Clinton PresidencyHillary Rodham Clinton, born in 1947, is an early “Baby Boomer”, the generational name generally assigned to those born during the post-World War II baby boom, between 1946 through 1964. This is a generation who came of age during the domestic cultural conscientiousness associated with the Viet Nam war era. It was a tumultuous time.

But Hillary Rodham (later Clinton) seems to have largely been immune to those cultural influences.

A native of Park Ridge, Illinois, an affluent Chicago suburb, Hillary Rodham attended Wellesley College, a highly selective private women’s liberal-arts college outside Boston, graduating in 1969 with a major in political science. She then attended Yale Law School, earning a JD degree in 1973. It was at Yale where she first met future president Bill Clinton, whom she married in 1975.

She has a long record as an advocate for children’s rights, and for better legal services for the poor, having been appointed by President Jimmy Carter to the board of the Legal Services Corporation in 1977, becoming their first female chair in 1978. Clinton was named the first female partner at the Rose Law Firm in Little Rock, Arkansas in 1979, and was twice included as one of the one hundred most influential lawyers in America by the National Law Journal.

Claims She Has Never Smoked Pot

Boomers are often associated with the counterculture, and the civil rights and the feminist movements of the 1970s. And while these cultural and legal changes have clearly left their impact on Clinton, she acknowledges she was not on the barricades during the cultural revolution that occurred in America in the late ’60s and the ’70s, and claims never to have smoked marijuana, recently telling Christiane Amanpour “Absolutely not. I didn’t do it when I was young, I’m not going to start now.”

Clinton has spent her entire adult life, including serving as first lady of Arkansas for a total of 12 years, eight years as America’s first lady, and eight years as a U.S. Senator from New York, living with the political reality that one could never be too careful when talking about contentious social issues — especially the then-radical idea of marijuana legalization — and it was always politically safer to support incremental change than to advocate for radical change. She exudes competence and strength, not innovation or risk-taking.

Yet there are reasons to be optimistic should she become president in 2017.

Her Position During the 2008 Campaign

While campaigning for president in 2007, Clinton rarely mentioned drug policy, but when she did she made it clear she was firmly against decriminalizing marijuana. “I don’t think we should decriminalize it, but we ought to do research into what, if any medical benefits it has.” Even then she showed some interest in the medical use of marijuana.

She did not indicate why she favored continuing to treat marijuana smokers as criminals, nor did she need to. None of the other candidates for the Democratic nomination were willing to challenge her on that issue. Then-candidate Barack Obama was himself no champion for pot law reform during that campaign. It was then considered both too radical for a mainstream politician, and too insignificant compared to other issues the country was dealing with.

Clinton’s Most Recent Statements

While Clinton has been slow to evolve her position on marijuana policy, her most recent statements do reflect a recognition that the politics of marijuana legalization are changing, and she must reflect some of those changes or risk alienating large numbers of voters, especially younger voters.

“I’m a big believer in acquiring evidence,” Clinton told NPR affiliate KPCC in July of 2014. “And I think we should see what kind of results we get, both from medical marijuana and from recreational marijuana, before we make any far-reaching conclusions. We need more studies. We need more evidence. And then we can proceed.”

Also in 2014, during a town hall with CNN, Clinton told Christiane Amanpour that she wants to “wait and see” how legalization goes in the states before making it a national decision. “There are younger people here who could help me understand this and answer it,” Clinton began. “At the risk of committing radical candor, I have to say I think we need to be very clear about the benefits of marijuana use for medicinal purposes. I don’t think we’ve done enough research yet, although I think for people who are in extreme medical conditions and who have anecdotal evidence that it works, there should be availability under appropriate circumstances.”

Then, showing her uneasiness with discussing marijuana policy generally, she attempts to make sure she has not gone too far, by adding: “But I do think we need more research because we don’t know how it interacts with other drugs.”

Clinton also sounded supportive of new Colorado and Washington laws that have legalized recreational marijuana for adults. “On recreational, states are the laboratories of democracy,” Clinton said. “We have at least two states that are experimenting with that right now. I want to wait and see what the evidence is.”

This time around it is clear that some of her advisors have alerted her to the reality that the marijuana legalization movement has finally come of age, and legalization is an option that must now be part of the national discussion. Marijuana legalization appears to be favored in several swing states. A Quinnipiac University survey conducted in March of 2015 found a majority of voters support full legalization in Florida (55 percent), Ohio (52 percent), and Pennsylvania (51 percent) — all key states that a Clinton campaign may need to win the general election.

What We Can Expect from a Hillary Clinton Presidency

Assuming the public support for marijuana legalization continues to surge, by the time President Hillary Clinton would be taking office, I would expect she will realize the political climate really has changed dramatically regarding this issue over the last few years, and she will have the option politically to do a number of helpful things without endangering her majority support. Reading tea leaves is always risky, but here are my best guesses as to how she would respond.

First, President Hillary Clinton would use her executive authority to reschedule marijuana to a lower schedule under the federal Controlled Substances Act, to facilitate more research on marijuana’s many medical uses. And while that would also open up the opportunity to eventually allow physicians to prescribe marijuana and pharmacists to dispense it, that process would first require the drug be approved by the Food and Drug Administration, a process that usually takes a decade or longer and costs tens of millions of dollars.

This modest change would be a politically safe move to make, as national polling consistently shows public support for the medical use of marijuana at nearly 80 percent.

Second, President Hillary Clinton would almost certainly continue the Obama policy of having the DOJ stand aside, and permit those states that wish to experiment with versions of legalization, both medical use and full legalization, to do so without federal interference. Changing course would be difficult for any incoming president, including the anti-pot Republican candidates, as the newly legalized industries in a handful of states (that list continues to grow) will have created tens of thousands of new, badly needed jobs, and raised hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue for those states. And, public support for ending prohibition will reinforce the importance politically of continuing the Obama policy.

And third, President Hillary Clinton would likely embrace the full decriminalization of marijuana, under both state and federal law, as initially recommended by the National Commission on Marijuana and Drug Abuse (the Shafer Commission) in 1972.

While this would be a total reversal of her position expressed during her campaign for president in 2007, it’s a “flip-flop” that can easily be justified on the basis of the unfair racial impact of the marijuana laws on black and brown Americans. She can embrace removing penalties for the possession and use of small amounts of marijuana, as a criminal justice reform, without embracing the use of marijuana itself.

Of course, no president can, without the support of a majority of Congress, decriminalize marijuana under federal law. But should she decide to use her “bully pulpit” to legitimize and advance the movement to decriminalize minor marijuana offenses, it would have a powerful impact on the state level, where nearly all marijuana arrests occur.

The first two of these advances would likely come during her first term, while the latter would more likely await the first couple of years of her second term, assuming her re-election. As President Obama has demonstrated, it is in the second term, when no further campaigns remain and the fear of alienating voters has abated, that most significant progress on these types of issues occurs.

More later on what we might expect from some of the Republican candidates, should they become president. But I will wait for a few months, to let the wackiest of the Republican candidates fade into oblivion. No point in wasting time analyzing candidates who have no chance of getting the nomination, and who should have had the good sense to stay out of the race. But first, let’s all enjoy the clowns in the circus we call a presidential campaign.

http://news.marijuana.com/news/2015/05/what-we-might-expect-from-a-hillary-clinton-presidency/

111 thoughts

  1. @Julian

    Nice reply ol buddy. In fact, I was wrong in what I replied to you–the battle of Puebla in question occurred in 1862–I knew that, but had a brain fart. Still the “Texicans” would’ve been hard-pressed to stop a French invasion that year too when they were barely able to keep the Yankees outta Texas. The Confederates were beaten in two significant battles (Pea Ridge and Wilson’s Creek) in Missouri and Arkansas fairly early in that war, 1862, I’m pretty sure, and were constantly worried thereafter about Yankee incursions into Texas.

    You’re right about the Lipan/Chiricowah, btw–they and those other tribes aforementioned were tough. Look at what Geronimo did for so many years. I know those tribes kept the Texas Rangers very busy throughout the Civil War. In fact, and I could be wrong, wasn’t Austin raided and partially destroyed by a tribe in those years? Maybe I’m thinking of another Texas city/town? (You don’t need to reply to this if you don’t want to, btw, as it has virtually nothing to do with pot legalization.) Hermanos por la causa!

  2. If Hillary is to be swayed to support cannabis legalization in any measure, the best person to do that would be Bernie Sanders, who will be pushing from the liberal side. Funny that he has not mentioned pot legalization as a way to curb our highest prison population.

  3. Warm up the tar I’ll bring the feathers if Clinton comes to town.
    I’m no fan of Obama but we have a better chance with a lame duck than a liar.

  4. If you care about the legalization of cannabis you should back Rand Paul as he is the only candidate who is actively trying to to decriminalize weed and make it legal for medical use in all states and leave recreational use up to individual states voting for it. The Carer’s Act. Clinton is anti weed as is Obama and its because it would fix the economy and the democrats are trying to collapse the system in order to create a secular socialist one world government. Weed would boost the economy and foil their plan. I say legalize weed and vote for people who will legalize it.

  5. Americans may vote for whoever they wish to vote for, or not.
    ” I want to wait and see what the evidence is”.
    I spoke to a young lady who just got back from Colorado recently; she said the economy is booming and that thing are going just fine now that marijuana has been legalized.
    Do you trust Hillary Clinton? I don’t.

  6. Why hang our hopes on what might be her position. Rand Paul is activly doing something about helping the cause. choose to vote on record, not propaganda!

  7. @Fat Freddy,

    I’d love to see Bernie Sanders as Pres. Not sure he can beat Hillary, but he’ll get my vote in the primary anyway.

    I haven’t heard much from him about pot, btw; are the reporters not asking that question?

  8. @Evening Bud;

    The raid you speak of is found here:

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Raid_of_1840

    I laughed when you said Texas history is off topic on a marijuana blog; (clearly we enjoy reviewing our history), but as marijuana legalization gets more mainstream and political leading up to 2016 elections I think a history lesson is just what the doctor ordered to help Americans still struggling to understand how racism and prohibition use governments for the acquisition of property. From this perspective, Indian wars, civil wars and wars for independence segue right into a discussion about a drug war.

    Another good follow up read is The Boy Captives, (distributed by Allen Smith Jr., 830-597-3212 po box Campwood TX 78833, or contact San Saba Printing at 915-372-3825) about the true story of the capture of John and Jeff Smith by Chief Tosacowadi ‘s band of Comanches accompanied by Lipan Apachies on March 3rd, 1867 near Dripping Springs Texas. The sons of a Texas Ranger, John Smith was captured at age 11 and his younger brother Jeff sold to Geronimo at the age of 8. The story reveals the startling contrasts and similarities between Texan and Comanche cultures in the way we acquisition property and the way we imprison, adopt, employ or liberate our captives of war.
    I find it revealing that we remember the Alamo and when all but 21 of 300 Texan prisoners of war were massacred by the Mexican dictator SantAna, but we don’t recall when Texan soldiers slaughtered 31 Comanche Chiefs and their families, women and children, which provoked the Great Raid of 1840. (I don ‘t remember hearing about that in my Texas history class… I only looked it up just now because we were talking about the subject … (Come to think of it, it was in that same 7th grade Texas History class that I only talked about the day we would have phones that could “search information and play TV”).

    The Texas Rangers were most deeply offended by the Indian practice of capture, but as much as it hurts my Texas pride, there were those among the Rangers that killed Indian children. The Rangers fought for land and title while the Comanche and Lipan Aoache fought for hunting grounds, survival (and sometimes just for fun). Had the two groups come to understand one another, Texas could have maintained the Republic. Except little did the Rangers know while they searched for Geronimo all over Texas and New Mexico, according to Jeff Smith they were as far as present day Seattle, having pot lucks with the Northwestern nations. It would take miles of barbed wire and a lot of dead buffalo to draw lines in the dirt for the plains Indian, much less reach an understanding on child captives that provoked so much bloodshed and tears. Boarding schools where Children were punished for speaking their native language didn’t help the situation either.

    There is a similar racial misunderstanding in the Drug War revealed in this blog when people choose to scapegoat child refugees for our failed drug policies. Today, as we continue to globalize our trade, currency and sovereignty, there are those who still believe that small Latin American nations are responsible for bringing the drug war across our borders, because they fail to understand that is our demand for the drugs and our failed drug (and immigration) policies that have created the violence out of our own Department of Justice. And the Prisoners of the Drug War reach far beyond our prison walls… Our captives are children separated by the Department of Health and Human Services that takes state custody of children whose parents consume marijuana while simultaneously owning the patent for Cannabinoids, #6630507.

    It makes me wonder how may prisoners of the drug war we have when we add the racial inequality, police brutality, the corrupt Drug Enforcement Agency, the ATF’s exclusive right to track or reveal the sale of U.S. weapons, and the proliferation of prohibition and the Drug War worldwide? Just how many children have been made casualties? And how often do politicians get away with blaming race and “Border security” to cover up the human cost of prohibition?

    If history reveals anything, its that we need continuing public education for students, parents and Congressman, funded by fairly taxed and legalized cannabis, so that prohibition not only ends, but is never allowed to happen again.

  9. I’m already warming up the feathers for the impending visits of Bush, Walker, Cruz, Christie, Mickey Mouse and all the other GOP prexy wannabes. It should make for very fun lynchings. In fact, that seems to be right up Rand Paul’s alley.

  10. Bernie Sanders supports marijuana reform and the end to the War on Drugs, and he is a way better candidate than Hilary or Rand Paul.

    Endorse Bernie Sanders!

  11. Clinton as president would bring about a more dander us world than we have now under Obama. I do not believe she would do anything but hurt the the attempts to legalize pot because they all know in Washington that the pot industry would be good for our country. The Democrats are destroying our country for a reason people. Wake up! The Republicans are doing the same in order to remain in control of the revenue that is generated by the so called drug war.
    Think and research before you vote. The media just puts out the left agenda

  12. @Julian,

    Thanks for the informative reply. I’d remembered reading about a raid, read it in a book years ago, but couldn’t remember the details.

    And you’re certainly right about the similarities to the racism (and genocide) back then and the racist policies in the “drug war” of today.

    Our knowledge of history in this country, alas, is usually pathetic. I’m always saddened to hear someone say they find history boring–that tells me they probably had little real exposure to history, or at least little interesting exposure to history, as well as poor history teachers–those who were too content to teach it “by the book.”

    I was fortunate on that score.

  13. @Jerry H,

    I found your comment about the “liberal media” interesting.

    I myself find the media to be highly conservative, nauseatingly conservative, and can barely watch it anymore. I can give you plenty of examples of their conservative bent, but will just use one example (unless you want more, lol): their shameless cheerleading of Bush’s Iraq War in 2003. You surely remember that, with the nightly images, on all three networks, CBS, NBC & ABC, of the terrorists going thru their training exercises, the prisoners at Guantanamo being frog-marched to their cells, and Tom Ridge’s nightly colored-coded “terrorist alerts.” Interesting that those color-coded warnings, and those nightly images of the terrorists training–all disappeared virtually the day Bush left office. Gee, that sounds like a media that was working hand-in-hand with the Bush Adm. to “justify” starting that war.

    As for the supposed liberality of the NYT and Wash Post, that’s a huge laugh too–Judith Miller, NYT foreign correspondent, was the lead cheerleader for the Iraq War; and WP’s editors were chomping at the bit for that phony war. Go back and look at some of their headlines, at the hysterical tone in their headlines. (And surprise of surprises, half the American public was sure Saddam attacked us on 9/11 and even more were sure he was on the verge of nuking the entire planet–gee, I wonder how such a large percentage of the American public could be so wrong?)

    Funny that the NYT and WaPo, those two iconic bastions of liberality, wouldn’t have pestered Cheney endlessly about his closed-door energy meetings with Haliburton and the other energy companies just prior to our invasion. (You know, kind of like the way they did, for 7 years, with the Clinton adm over the Whitewater “scandal” or Obama and Bengazigate.) What oh what could Cheney and his energy company pals have been talking about prior to the invasion? Divvying up Iraq’s oil perhaps? We’ll never know because of the complete lack of curiosity of our “liberal” media.

    In fact, had we had a real liberal media the Iraq War would’ve never happened–Bush’s redirection from the terrorists who actually hit us on 9/11 to Saddam Hussein, who NEVER attacked us, would’ve been exposed and repeated until there was no support for the Iraq War. Cheney’s assertion that we “knew” were the WMD were–“Outside Tikrit”–would’ve been exposed for its falsehood. The “aluminum tube” crap would’ve never gotten off the ground. Joe Wilson’s exposure of the Bush adm’s lies about the yellow-cake uranium would have been front and center (and the neocons would probably have been less brazen about exposing Wilson’s wife as a CIA agent.)

    Moreover, we would not have been subjected to the nightly interviews, on all three networks, of the neocons in Bush’s adm who were pushing for war in Iraq–Wolfowitz, Perle, Rice, Cheney (ad nauseum) etc etc. No comment was too insignificant, no allegation too outrageous, for the networks to eagerly give them the mike.

    A real liberal media wouldn’t have distracted us peons with Bush’s $300 rebate, while giving almost no air time or ink to Bush’s huge tax cuts for the billionaires, tax cuts that, along with the two-trillion dollar price tag for the Iraq war, sucked all the money out of our system and nearly sent us into a second Great Depression. (I’m sure you remember, when Bush left office, our economy was hemorrhaging 800,000 jobs, repeat 800,000 jobs, a MONTH! Yep, the “liberal” media has really played that up!)

    Because our media is a corporate entity it doesn’t see disseminating the news as its primary job, but instead protecting its corporate interests. Your comment about its being “liberal” is testimony to the effectively-subtle job it does of covering its ass.

    If you like, I’ll give you more examples of the conservatism in our media, you know, like its coverage of marijuana legalization and prohibition. (And you thought it was only Fox News.)

  14. Hey Democratic Party, forget it, you aren’t cool enough, that is you aren’t good enough spiritually, to ride this wave. Hillary Clinton won’t try very hard to stop marijuana legalization, and one day she will say that she “had been given intelligence on marijuana by the drug war community which turned out in retrospect to have not been entirely reliable.”

  15. Amid threats from bike gangs around Texas that prompted heightened security in parts of Waco Monday, the Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission closed Twin Peaks for liquor sales for a week.

    “That’s a good thing for law enforcement here,” Swanton said. – AP article

    Res ipsa loquitur…!

  16. OH, get real. Your comments are counterproductive and limited in perspective. I suggest you focus less on what divides us and more on what we all agree on to compel and educate the hypocrisy of our drug policy, such as the 17 U.S. Soldiers who commit suicide per day for symptoms of PTSD gained in wars both Clinton and Bush voted for that are perfectly treatable from consuming cannabis. Let’s get the candidates to answer real questions, instead of fabricating fruitless political dogma.

  17. @Eric K. Johnson,

    The irony of violence in the peaceful little town of Waco, (despite what stigmatized memories we retain of FBI tanks surrounding Branch Davidians that are conjured up) appears to have no limit.

    My take on the Bandidos is that money is drying up from the demand for Mexican cartel marijuana, which means there is increased tension among biker gangs to fight over less trafficking, (No, I’m afraid I’m not convinced the Bandidos and the Cossacks were simply arguing about parking disputes in the bathroom…)

    Decreased narco-income shifting to a fast-growing billion dollar legal marijuana supply within the United States means less organized-crime bribe money for custom agents, law enforcement, Judges and Congressman. As a result, what would have been hush money in the press, the assassins and law enforcement alike has escalated into a public crackdown from law enforcement, whose informants, those within the biker gangs, are the ones who make the calls.

    With the additional attention to the Sheriff’s Association for stalling out our marijuana legalization bills from Calendar Committee here in Texas on OUR tax dollar,(by lobbying Todd Hunter, the Republican chair of said committee) there will be an additional attempt among paid informants and organized crime within law enforcement and the DOJ to look for scapegoats, hence, the Bandidos go to prison.

    Twin Peaks getting their liquor license revoked was just the little cherry of irony on top of the hypocrisy cake.

  18. (No, I’m afraid I’m not convinced the Bandidos and the Cossacks were simply arguing about parking disputes in the bathroom…) – Julian

    It was about money…and lack of legal safe access.

  19. Here’s what a lot of people seem to be missing on this: Hillary’s statements about waiting for the evidence to come in yadda yadda are all well and good when it comes to whether or not an individual should choose to consume cannabis. That’s not the issue here though; the issue is whether or not to use government violence and the threat of violence in response to the consumption, production, or distribution of cannabis.

    Her lukewarm response says all that needs to be said here, though her anti-cannabis record is the icing on the cake.

    On this issue, Rand Paul is by a long shot the best candidate so far, followed by Bernie Sanders.

  20. If the presidential election was to be held today, May 21, 2015, Bernie Sanders would get my vote! The other candidates are not even close.

    It would be really nice if Hilary would step aside and help to get Mr. Sanders elected. God knows we don’t need or want another Clinton or (God Forbid) another Bush in office. Jeb should crawl back into his nasty smelly little hole!

  21. You do realize that the Executive Branch, without the advice and consent of congress, like you said, can not legalize recreational marijuana. The Executive, however, by executive order, it is possible to reclassify marijuana and its metabolites from a schedule I drug to any other schedule class which the executive may deem necessary. Its been done before, so there is a precedence for it, although I can’t recall specifics. I’m not sure if they can totally remove it from the list of controlled substances, but it can be changed in that way.

  22. We need more studies, where have I heard that before. Under Nixon, under Reagan, under Bill Clinton. Were going to do a study to decide the issue once and for all, this one will go to the bank. Each time the recommendation was to roll back prohibition and the administration’s response was. “We need more studies” Under Clinton that is exactly what will happen again.
    Rand Paul, like any Republican is going to have to fire up the Tea Party to win. Tea Party = Old White voters, the only demographic still strongly opposed to any and all MJ reform, Don’t hold your hit.
    Any other Republican and it’s Party like it’s 1984.
    Obama made a few overtures ( I’m not going to lead the charge, but I’m not going to stand in the doorway either, in other words, if Congress sends me a bill on MJ reform that I didn’t ask for, I’ll probably sign it.) He was rewarded with overwhelming Republican victories in 2010 and 2014 What’s that demographic breakdown again. Broad support for legalization across all groups except Old White people and Republicans… Proving once again the Democrat stoners don’t vote and Republican stoners ( yes I know quite a few) vote for Republicans.

  23. @ Julian

    Yes. People need to be taught that marijuana is a multi-faceted medicinal herb which not only can help soldiers and ex-soldiers who have PTSD but can also unclog the judicial system while also getting rid of epilepsy.

    The problem lies in the inherent federal corruption that shows in any industry, be it tobacco, big pharma, oil, war, etc. These crooks will bend the rules in order to make as much money as possible off of any booming industry and make a big show out of it because at the end of the day, more money is in their bank account when they fall asleep at night. And this is NOT I repeat, NOT in the Constitution, nor is it involved with the ideas of democracy, republic, or intelligentsia. That philosophy is derived from the essence of modern-day “federal republic” that is capitalism.

    I am not blaming the ever-successful concept of capitalism for the state of this union where around seventy percent of Americans live under the poverty line and I can’t legally smoke a joint in my backyard, I blame the sick opportunists and lobbyists that make up Washington DC.

    And if you got this far, you should also know that there are possible ways to fix our issue (why you’re on this page). Start a fund, do some field research with a legitimate scientist

  24. Time doesn’t run backwards, at least in the macro world – G.G.

    The recent study of Quantum physics reveals the potential for particles to simultaneously exist in two places at once, regardless of “distance/time”.

    I want to move forward to that other place/time…where sanity may prevail?

    Of all the positions in the multi-verse, We got stuck in this anti-sanity bizarro dimension?…better luck/Karma next time?…or not.

  25. I am not blaming the ever-successful concept of capitalism for the state of this union where around seventy percent of Americans live under the poverty line – AJello

    Why not?…Capitalism is a rapacious, inherently unjust scheme employed to create wealth for a Ruling Rich Class… “created”(Robbed!) by systematically stealing the fruit harvested by the laborious work performed by their duped/ increasingly dis-satisfied Underclass.

  26. The threat of another Clinton Presidency is sickening! Vote for Bernie Sanders or maybe Rand Paul. Paul is a bit of a flake, but a lot better than any of the other GOP’ers running. Hillary has to “discover America”. I mean it is good a candidate is actually talking with Americans, why was she even interested in running when she doesn’t really know what is going on??? She ran in 2008 and ran as George W. Bush Lite, now she wants to run as The Continuation of the Obama Presidency that she didn’t like too much. Umm, what the heck is she even doing? Like she forgot about America for eight years, apparently, and now she has to find out what’s going on. Doesn’t she live here? The shittiest ticket I can dream up is Romney-Clinton 2016. I know they aren’t in the same party, but the only thing they have a difference in is that Hillary makes taking care of the environment part of the deal. That is her only good characteristic. She knows the environment is important. Now, can she tell a good plan from a bad one??? Not so much.

  27. Eric, “Why not?…Capitalism is a rapacious, inherently unjust scheme employed to create wealth for a Ruling Rich Class… “created”(Robbed!) by systematically stealing the fruit harvested by the laborious work performed by their duped/ increasingly dis-satisfied Underclass.”

    That isn’t the result of Capitalism, that is the result of Capitalism Concepts being Abused to Further the Narcissistic Agenda. See the huge, massive part really, Marx missed out on is the newer theories of Personality Disorders. Narcissists, we are often told, are people to look up to. How ever, they will always seek to belittle or subjugate others even subconsciously. It is these exact shitheads that cannot handle the responsible of living in a Capitalist Society. Freedom isn’t for them, really they need a cage. And we need to stop voting for them. People that get their power by talking shit about marijuana users and then abuse them are performing exactly as narcissists with an antisocial component. Judges that claim you’ve done something terrible that needs their work to fix when all you did was own marijuana are behaving like lunatic because this behavior (they have been taught) is how they maintain authority.

    Really assholes? How about you pigs and pigs judges that hallucinate “dangers of marijuana” in order to “justify being able to harm their fellows”. Narcissists are like children, but more stupid. They hate to learn and so it is very hard to explain to these assholes that breaking the law to enforce bullshit drugs laws is illegal, but they really don’t get it. Their minds are not quite right. Authority is more important to all Narcissists than is get the guy that did the crime. This is exactly why we have so many innocent people on Death Row. Getting the right person isn’t as important as pretending you know what you’re doing.

    Our systems promote all kinds of Narcissists to positions of authority, when really we need to stop these unlearnables from ever reaching a position over anyone. You can’t trust these kinds of people with taking out the trash, but we think they can make policy that doesn’t suck donkey balls? Why?

    Narcissists never stop lying, right Billary Clinton?

  28. Really assholes? How about you pigs and pigs judges that hallucinate “dangers of marijuana” in order to “justify being able to harm their fellows” go drown in a lake??? That is exactly what Jesus did with a bunch of crazy pigs, he drown them.

  29. Eric, BTW, the Multi-verse model is less science and more science fiction. There are no higher dimensions made of probability, it is just a thought experiment. And time is not a “dimension”, but it can be mathematically isolated like a separate dimension. Time is a component of the three dimensions, i.e. the dimensions don’t work/exist without time.

    This is the only version of reality that exists. Right now, for the time being
    🙂

  30. Yeah dude capitalism is like, totally terrible. That is why I, like moved to Cuba and shit. Marijuana is like, totally legal there dude. Don’t listen to stories about how the regime considers it a “detriment”, similar to prostitution. Like the Castro regime like, welcomed me with open arms back then, man. Fidel himself like, sat down with me and we got blazin’ together talking ’bout the revolution and shit and like how he and his buddy Che freed the homos from the Batista labor camps.

    #reefergate

  31. @Anonymous

    You need new bait, Dude…yours is too weak to be attractive…Dude.

    Vote like you have a choice?

    Up your game if you want to play?

  32. @ Anonymous,

    It seems to be an “either or” thing with you. Either accept capitalism or go live in a communist country if you don’t like it. That rings a bell from the 1960s, “America, love it or leave it.” Or, to put it another way, if you don’t like the way things are, don’t try to change it, just get the hell out!

    Is your enmity just reserved for communist countries, or do you feel the same way about “socialist” countries, like western European countries? For decades, one of the few places on Earth you could go to and buy MJ without getting busted was a socialist country, the Netherlands.

    Last I heard the only country in the world today (country, not individual states) that has legal MJ is a country run by a socialist president: Uruguay.

    Back to the commies: You give an example of a communist country that doesn’t want to legalize pot–I’ve got news for you, there are plenty of capitalist countries that don’t want legalization.

    I personally wouldn’t want to live in a communist country, but I don’t relish living in a capitalist country either. For every fault you can find with the communists, I’m sure I can match one with capitalists.

    For one, we here in the good ol’ USA, the center of capitalism today, have more people incarcerated than any other country on earth.

    And we have a bigger military budget than the next, what, 12, 13, countries combined. Why would a capitalist country, whose main goal is to generate lots of money, need such a gigantic military? (More than Russia, China, North Korea and the next 9 or 10 countries combined.) And why would it so feverishly try to arm its police forces with military weapons? Could it be the capitalists are afraid of the little people?

    I’ve love to hear your reply, comrade capitalist (or is comrade boot-licker more apropos?).

    @ Dave Evans,

    You’re certainly right about narcissists; I would add that they come in all political stripes.

  33. @Dave Evans

    I agree that Capitalism is vulnerable to exploitation by “packs” of narcissistic individuals…and their cohorts/dupes.

    I would suggest that any System is only as competent and fair as the individuals put in charge of that System.

    I totally agree narcissists (and their minions) have covertly and overtly corrupted the intended function of our system.

  34. Could it be the capitalists are afraid of the little people? –

    I can’t count the times I’ve heard the statement, “They don’t care anything about us”.

    I usually counter that misconception by asking the question, ” Why do you suppose they pay so much attention to what we are or are not saying”…?

    “They” have a finger on the Public’s “pulse” at all times…in order to prevent a spark from spreading ?…into a wildfire?

  35. That rings a bell from the 1960s, “America, love it or leave it.” – Evening Bud

    Wow, that certainly brings back a flood of memories!

    I was one of those long haired hippies who decided to stay and try to change America for the betterment of all Citizens of our Country.

    The doors of perception were opened for a moment and subsequently slammed shut by the people who recognized increased awareness/ consciousness was a threat to their Capitalist Consumer Scheme for “Consumers” who did not know they were in need of products they didn’t even know they were missing!

  36. Time is a component of the three dimensions, i.e. the dimensions don’t work/exist without time – Dave Evans

    Time does not move…what we think of as the “passage of “Time” is actually the perception of an “event”.

    We are simply witnessing processes.

    Every thing arises and passes away…does not need time in the equation.

    Time is a Human construct employed to navigate and predict “places/positions” in the event process.

  37. East is East…and West is West…somewhere in the middle is probably best?

    OM MANI PADME HUM…is a doorway to a mystery that can not be accurately described using language…but can be alluded to or understood by words used only as conceptual signposts.

  38. @ Erik K Johnson,

    America back at that time, the 1960s, was an even more intolerant place than it is today. Many conservatives had a visceral hatred of hippies and longhairs back then. I’m not sure some of the younger people today realize the level of hatred that existed then, sometimes from parents toward their own kids.

    That’s part of the lingering prejudice against marijuana by some members of that generation, a prejudice that obviously continues to this day.

    Time of course is the great equalizer.

  39. “Time is a Human construct employed to navigate and predict “places/positions” in the event process.” Uhhhhhh……… That’s only half of Special Relativity. You are heading in the right direction, but Time is very real. It is the Higher dimension folks (M and String Theory) who seem to think of time as just a dimension and refer to it like you do. It is real, but you cannot separate it from the other three dimensions–hence the concept of Space-Time. Time continues flowing whether there is anyone there to watch it happen or not. Time doesn’t not exist for Photons, if you tried explaining what time is to a photon, it would tell you it is just an illusion based on your position; but how can one get to a different position without time???

  40. Edit “Time does not exist for Photons” and they also don’t exist in three dimensions. A photon is a point and a wave, so it only has two dimensions plus some momentum. From a photon’s point of view, it is created and absorbed in the same instant even if it traveled for Trillions of miles over Hundreds of light years. So basically, you’d only be able to convince me time isn’t real if I was a photon. But since I exist in three dimensions, time is very real for me. And you too.

  41. She is bought and paid for, just like Bush, just Like McCain, just like Obama.

    The Two Parties are the same thing….to keep doing the same thing over and over again, and expecting a different result is madness.

    Hilary will protect the Status Quo, just like any other Republican or Democrat.

    Voting for her is as stupid as voting for Jeb Bush…

  42. But since I exist in three dimensions, time is very real for me. And you too. – Dave Evans

    No one knows the mystery of particle or wave or “wavicle’ function.

    There is no specific “now” anywhere.

    How could humans with only five (potentially rudimentary?) senses (compared with other inhabitants of the possible “multiverse”) detect parallel dimensions?

    I am one of those M (multi-verse/multi-dimension) and String Theory guys.

    No one knows how many strings 7…?…11?

    Every Physicist I have ever communicated with disagrees with every other Physicist I have ever communicated with…leading me to believe Humans are good at believing their own theories…just like both you and I do.

    I suggest we agree to disagree until further information becomes available through current experiments being conducted @Hadron particle accelerator/collider @CERN.

    I maintain time is a human created device.

    Events don’t take time to occur.

    Time will surely tell.

  43. “How could humans with only five (potentially rudimentary?) senses (compared with other inhabitants of the possible “multiverse”) detect parallel dimensions?”

    Because that isn’t science, but Science Fiction. Ever hear of these thing called “conservation of energy and mass”? It is impossible for “new universes” to split off from existing universes just because possibility exists. We do see this this kind of activity at the quantum level because of this conservation of mass and energy, but to turn around and say, “Yeah sure there is enough energy to randomly copy the entire universe every hundredth of a second because ‘possibility” is just not making any sense. Possibility isn’t mass nor energy. If M-theory is real, that model is total crap.

    It is the exact positions of very tiny particles that can not be realized at specific times, it isn’t the entire universe/multiverse that is working under the same exact rules that a quark does. The smaller you look at a subatomic level, the closer you get to mass and energy interchangeable and where/how new elements are built. But what is fueling the Univeral Xerox Machine M-theorists have convinced themselves of? It would be as if the Big Bang never stopped, just fountains out dozens of Universes a second but fully formed and current.

  44. It is rather like the same kind of logic that Evil Conservatives use when they try to explain that “Trickle Down Economics Work”. But in this reality (the one we all share), it only “works” in their heads.

  45. @Dave Evans

    Have it your way.

    I’m positive greater minds than mine are currently pondering these scientific questions.

    I’m simply relying on my G.E.D. diploma.

    You are a Physicist?

  46. @Dave Evans

    What is dark matter/energy?

    How much exists and where?

    Describe dark matter?

    I’m interested in your explanation!

  47. @Dave Evans

    I promise physics is unrelated to “evil conservatives”!

    Character assassination by false comparison is beneath you, Dave?

Leave a Reply