March 17, 2008

Barack Obama’s Marijuana-Go-Round Explained: He Didn’t Know What “Decriminalization” Meant

Back in February, we tried to make sense of Barack Obama’s ever-changing position on decriminalizing marijuana:

In 2004, Barack was in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

In 2007, Barack was not in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

In 2008 — just this past Thursday, in fact — Barack was in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

His campaign, forgetting all about the debate last fall, said Barack was always in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

But then, “before the day was over,” Barack was not in favor of decriminalizing marijuana. Again.

If you don’t feel totally baked after trying to figure that out, Jeralyn at TalkLeft discovers the supposed truth (this time around, anyway):

Now he’s clear: he opposes decriminalization of marijuana.

What accounts for this latest switch? His campaign says he didn’t understand what decriminalization meant.

And Obama was a lawyer?

And the editor of the Harvard Law Review?

And a former pot smoker whose freedom rested on knowing whether or not weed had been “decriminalized”?

Gee, maybe he can use that as an excuse for his pot-smoking — he didn’t know it was illegal!

Jeralyn adds:

I think it’s a fair question to ask if he’s being disingenous now, first about raising his hand by mistake and now saying he was confused about what decriminalization means, or whether in 2004 he was engaging in a campaign ploy to attract the youth vote.

Hit the TalkLeft link for more, with some spirited (and often amusing) reader comments!

Posted by: Sapphocrat

Comment on this story

 |   |  Category: Barack Obama, Crime, Marijuana, Random Stupidity






February 22, 2008

State Bill Protects Employment Rights of Medical Marijuana Patients

From Americans for Safe Access:

State Bill Protects Employment Rights of Medical Marijuana Patients

AB 2279 would reverse the State Supreme Court in Ross v. Raging Wire

Sacramento, CA — Assemblymember Mark Leno (D-San Francisco) and several co-authors introduced a bill yesterday that would protect the rights of hundreds of thousands of medical marijuana patients in California from employment discrimination. The bill leaves intact existing state law prohibiting medical marijuana consumption at the workplace and protects employers from liability by carving out an exception for safety-sensitive positions. The employment rights bill, which is being co-authored by Assemblymembers Patty Berg (D-Eureka), Loni Hancock (D-Berkeley) and Lori Saldaña (D-San Diego), is in response to a January decision by the California Supreme Court in Ross v. RagingWire. National medical marijuana advocacy group Americans for Safe Access (ASA) argued the case before the court and is now a sponsor of the bill.

“The California Supreme Court decision said that an employer may fire someone solely because they use medical marijuana outside the workplace,” said Assemblymember Leno. “Long ago, the legislature prohibited patient use of medical cannabis in the workplace or during working hours,” continued Leno. “AB 2279 is merely an affirmation of the intent of the voters and the legislature that medical marijuana patents need not be unemployed to benefit from their medicine.”

On January 24, in a 5-2 decision, the California Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s ruling that denied qualified patients a remedy from employment discrimination, based either on their status as a patient or a positive test for marijuana. The plaintiff in the case, Gary Ross, is a 46-year old disabled veteran who was a systems engineer living Carmichael, California, when he was fired from his job in 2001 at RagingWire Telecommunications for testing positive for marijuana. “It’s important that we not allow wholesale employment discrimination in California,” said former plaintiff Gary Ross. “If the court is going to ignore the need for protection, then it’s up to the legislature to ensure that productive workers like me are free from discrimination.”

The decision in Ross v. RagingWire closed the door on redress through the courts, shifting the debate to the state legislature. California is not alone in its attempt to affirm employment protections for medical marijuana patients. Both Oregon and Hawaii have introduced similar legislation aimed at clarifying the intent of the state legislatures. This recent multi-state effort builds on existing legislation adopted in ten out of twelve medical marijuana states, including California, which already sought to protect patients from employment discrimination. “We welcome and strongly endorse this clarification from the legislature,” said ASA spokesperson Kris Hermes. “Despite the ill-conceived ruling by the California Supreme Court, the intent of state legislatures has been to recognize the civil rights of patients and to offer them reasonable protections.”

Before the court made its final decision, Ross enjoyed the support of ten state and national medical organizations, all of the original co-authors of the Medical Marijuana Program Act (SB 420), and disability rights groups. Since it began recording instances of employment discrimination in 2005, ASA has received hundreds of such reports from all across California. Employers that have either fired patients from their job, threatened them with termination, or denied them employment because of patient status or because of a positive test for marijuana, include Costco Wholesale, UPS, Foster Farms Dairy, DirecTV, the San Joaquin Courier, Power Auto Group, as well as several construction companies, hospitals, and various trade union employers.

Further information:

Employment rights legislation introduced yesterday:
http://safeaccessnow.org/downloads/AB2279.pdf

California Supreme Court decision in Ross v. RagingWire:
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/downloads/Ross_Ruling.pdf

Review legal briefs and more about the Ross v. RagingWire case here:
http://www.safeaccessnow.org/Ross

# # #

With over 30,000 active members in more than 40 states, Americans for Safe Access (ASA) is the largest national member-based organization of patients, medical professionals, scientists and concerned citizens promoting safe and legal access to cannabis for therapeutic use and research. ASA works to overcome political and legal barriers by creating policies that improve access to medical cannabis for patients and researchers through legislation, education, litigation, grassroots actions, advocacy and services for patients and the caregivers.

Posted by: Sapphocrat

Comment on this story

 |   |  Category: California, Employment/ENDA, Health & Wellness, Marijuana






February 3, 2008

Barack Obama’s Flip-Flop-Flip-Flop on Marijuana: Multiple Brain Farts, or Just Lying?

Steve Chapman, in today’s Chicago Tribune:

On Thursday, The Washington Times reported that in 2004, as a candidate for the U.S. Senate, Obama came out for decriminalizing marijuana use. That usually means eliminating jail sentences and arrest records for anyone caught with a small amount for personal use, treating it more like a traffic offense than a violent crime. But in a show of hands at a debate last fall, he indicated that he opposed the idea.

When confronted on the issue by the Times, however, the senator defended his original ground. His campaign said he has “always” supported decriminalization. It’s a brave position, and therefore exceedingly rare among practicing politicians. Which may be why it didn’t last. Before the day was over, the Obama campaign issued a statement saying he thinks “we are sending far too many first-time non-violent drug users to prison for very long periods of time” but “does not believe that we should treat offenses involving marijuana with a simple fine or just by confiscating the drug.” Recently, he had told a New Hampshire newspaper, “I’m not in favor of decriminalization.”

Let’s get this straight:

In 2004, Barack was in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

In 2007, Barack was not in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

In 2008 — just this past Thursday, in fact — Barack was in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

His campaign, forgetting all about the debate last fall, said Barack was always in favor of decriminalizing marijuana.

But then, “before the day was over,” Barack was not in favor of decriminalizing marijuana. Again.

We would comment, but we’ve probably used the word “bullshit” in conjunction with “Obama” too many times this month.

Besides, Chapman says it all:

“This episode reveals that as a candidate, Obama is more fond of bold rhetoric than bold policies.”

Well, pot smokers? You gonna trust Mr. Finger-In-the-Wind?

Posted by: Sapphocrat

Comment on this story

 |   |  Category: Barack Obama, Crime, Election 2008, Marijuana






September 27, 2007

Munchies That Give You the Munchies


Feds Shut Down Marijuana Candy Factory In Oakland

OAKLAND, Calif. — Drug Enforcement Administration agents have shut down a factory that produced marijuana-laced candy and other food products in Oakland, Special Agent in Charge Javier F. Pena said Thursday.

. . .

The company distributes its candies to cannabis clubs throughout the Bay Area, Southern California, Seattle, Vancouver, and Amsterdam markets, Pena said.

Some of the marijuana-laced products seized include chocolate candy bars in multiple flavors, cookies, ice cream, peanut butter, jelly, BBQ sauce, chocolate syrup, flavored energy drinks, granola bars, moon pies, brownies, chocolate covered pretzels and “rice krispy” treats, according to DEA public information officer Casey McEnry.

. . .

The DEA operation seized hundreds of the products, approximately 460 marijuana plants, one handgun, an unknown amount of U.S. currency, and a 2005 GMC truck.

. . .

Product order forms seized from a cannabis club operating in Southern California show Tainted products were offered from $2.50 to $20.00 for each item, depending on the type and strength of marijuana product ordered, McEnry said. …

. . .

Tainted Inc. began as a small operation that originally cooked marijuana leaves in butter and made chocolate truffles, McEnry said. …

Check out the slideshow of products

Discuss this story

Posted by: Sapphocrat

Comment on this story

 |   |  Category: California, Marijuana