Obama says drug legalization not answer to cartels

[bluedigger]

Source: The Associated Press

President Barack Obama says legalizing drug use is not the answer to trafficking in illegal narcotics in the Americas, countering a growing chorus in Latin America to discuss decriminalization as a way to ease deadly cartel violence.

Obama says he is open to having a debate about legalization but he doesn't believe it will lead to an agreement to legalize drugs.

Obama was speaking to an assembly of top executives from the hemisphere as part of the sixth Summit of the Americas here.

The president said the answer to the drug cartels is societies that have strong economics, rules of law, and a law enforcement infrastructure that is sound. He said the responsibility also rests with countries that are big destinations for the drugs to reduce demand for illegal narcotics.

Read more: http://www.cortezjournal.com/article/20120414/API/1204140696/Obama-says-drug-legalization-not-answer-to-cartels

---

There is no more at the link.

[loudsue]

1. Obama couldn't be more mistaken about that issue.

It's a crime for the entire world that he can't see that.

[AZ Progressive]

11. For Obama, its worse to be seen as soft on crime than endorse legalization n/t

[duhneece]

16. You're absolutely right!

Fortunately, other countries (Portugal, Switzerland) are looking at other perspectives, like treating addiction from a public health focus instead of a law enforcement focus.
The US's War on Drugs policy have hurt millions worldwide.
Drugs are bad, but the drug war is worse, hurting the poor, minorities and liberals especially hard.

[Ruby the Liberal]

49. Can you show me one legitimate study that concludes that

marijuana is an "addicting" substance?

I don't disagree with your premise, but I think that the "addiction" label is misapplied, especially considering the public costs related to proven legal 'drugs' such as alcohol and tobacco.

I remain unconvinced that marijuana has addictive properties, but no question, that will come up in any discussion about it, so if you have linkage, that would be great.

[duhneece]

88. I don't believe marijuana is addicting

I do believe people can become addicted to behaviors and non-addicting foods, like sodas.

[Bo]

69. ...and we continue on the path of insanity

Stupid is as stupid does

[and-justice-for-all]

70. I concur your statement...nt

[FlaGatorJD]

92. From the posts here, I would again suggest The President Has a Growing MJ Problem

The President Has a Growing Marijuana Problem
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002253036

While some here believe it's only a problem, if it effects his reelection, apparently I'm
not the only one here that sees the issue as a little bigger than that.

. . but hey, look at the bright side, the Drug War is working so well and it's lead to this great new investments industry: Prisons

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002256598

I support the President when it comes to the election and agree that any soft talk now would jeopardize his reelection, but IMHO he's more wrong on drug policy than possibly any other issue, especially when it comes to MJ.

I hope after candidate Obama gets reelected , President Obama has a breakthrough that brings him new found clarity on this issue. I can HOPE, right?

[Politicalboi]

2. Oh please

The president said the answer to the drug cartels is societies that have strong economics, rules of law, and a law enforcement infrastructure that is sound.

Because it has worked so well all these years. But if Obama did agree to legalization, the Repukes would have open season on him. They would probably make commercials showing Obama giving drugs to children at the White House.

[anti-alec]

17. I don't care if Republicans wants to nail them

A MAJORITY of Americans wants to see marijuana legalized.

Obama doesn't, and neither does the corporations. It's painfully clear which side of the aisle Obama is on.

And he has smoked marijuana before - so it makes him a big hypocrite.

[Bluenorthwest]

18. Did you notice that the GOP has open season on him no matter what he does?

That makes the 'if he does this, the GOP won't like it' argument sort of moot. They will make rotten commercials against him no matter what he does.
He supports these racist policies on his own, not out of reaction.

[CrispyQ]

22. Bravo!!

I am so sick of hearing that Obama can't stand up for liberal policies because the GOP will go after him. You are right - they will go after him regardless! In fact, they have shown that they will go after him even when he gives them what they want, like a mandated insurance health care act.

[msongs]

34. sorry but he's not really a stand up kind of guy on many issues the public is ahead with nt

[Phlem]

51. Exactly!

Need to look tough on crime during the election so we can't be having a sane conversation. Wonder if things will change after his election?

-p

[Ken Burch]

62. "strong economics, rules of law and a law enforcement infrastructure"

is the George W. Bush formula for everything.

We could do ads in response pointing out that the "War On Drugs" has failed, and ended up serving no purpose but creating a bogus excuse to deprive hundreds of thousands of people, mainly African-Americans, of their right to vote.

Our party has GOT to stop working from the assumption that it CAN'T win the argument. We DID win it in 2008, for God's sake.

[felix_numinous]

67. The problem with President Obama's logic

that..."the answer to the drug cartels is societies that have strong economics, rules of law, and a law enforcement infrastructure that is sound." is that we have a weak economy, chronic corruption in law enforcement institutions (DEA,CIA,ect), and our law enforcement infrastructure is set up to support the prison industry/big pharma/arms corporations--which have become cartels themselves!

The corruption INSIDE the system is the problem--and you cannot get a sane solution to a problem by asking for answers FROM people who stand to gain by the status quo. Period.

Legalization is PART of a larger social vision--which depends upon the REFORM of corruption within these institutions--so that people working there rededicate themselves to the welfare of the common good, rather than blinding allowing this country to be dragged down further into mobster rule.

[PavePusher]

76. Prohibition II.

It's working so well, we're going to have to try it longer, harder, faster and deeper.

Oooooohhhh, shit.....

[rfranklin]

3. sorry, President Obama, but you are wrong on that one...we've had 50 years of War on Drugs...

and it's not changed one bit. If it is legalized and regulated and commoditized the criminal profit motive is gone. Then we would just have to worry about the corporate Drug peddlers.

[Jamaal510]

4. Whoever that's advising Obama on his drug policy

needs to have their head examined. On Real Time with Maher, they said that he has been even harsher on drug users than * was in his 2 terms. The WH thinks by being more aggressive on drugs, it will attract more conservative voters. But those people more than likely won't vote for him, anyway, no matter how many times the Oaksterdam University gets raided. I feel like going to the WH one day, and asking him straight up "WHY ARE YOU DOING THIS?!"

[cbrer]

5. The only way legalization will ever happen

Is if drug companies can extract and concentrate, or synthesize THC for therapeutic use.

Smoking a natural, cultivatible substance, and providing our own destressing/decompressing agent won't do for the powers that be.

[phantom power]

6. It would be an answer to the prison industrial complex

I suppose whether or not it was an "answer to drug cartels" would depend on whether they made manufacture/selling of drugs legal, as opposed to just possession.

Just reversing our trend toward being Prison Nation would be worth the price of admission. No doubt the conservatives hate that idea too, since they're all about punishment and maintaining a caste society.

[killbotfactory]

7. Our government is addicted to the drug war. nt

[Kolesar]

8. We need a Canadian, "quit prosecuting and persecuting" styled approach to drugs

It seems to work up there in the land of the snowboarders.

[AZ Progressive]

9. Ever since the Willie Horton ads, politicians have been afraid to be seen as soft on crime n/t

[BootinUp]

10. Not the answer to winning Pres Elections. shhhhh

[Warren Stupidity]

12. Not one to take a stand, is he.

Oh well....

[AZ Progressive]

13. Anyone expect anything different from Obama on an Election Year? n/t

[Duer 157099]

20. ...or any year? n/t

[anti-alec]

14. Obama is dead wrong

Legalization of marijuana WILL take the majority of the cash flow out of the cartel's pockets into American pockets. That money will be recycled into the American economy.

For many states, it is their #1 cash crop, and on the top three for the rest.

Legalization will make the U.S. economy recover, and Obama is preventing that. He wants it under corporate control.

That tells you how little respect I have for Obama on this subject. Other than that, he's okay.

[cstanleytech]

27. No, hes just not suicidal enough to agree that making drugs legal may be the answer.

[Voice for Peace]

45. The fact that he's open to listening to the other leaders on this is huge imo

[Bluenorthwest]

15. Then why isn't his methodology working?

He's wrong, and the world knows he's wrong.

[limpyhobbler]

19. This is bullshit

He could have least opened the door a crack. He could have said something like "It may be worthwhile to consider partially legalizing some drugs," or something like that.

But no. We get zero.

He thinks he can ignore those of us who care about this issue because he thinks we have no choice but to vote for him. In other words, these voters are being taken for granted.

[SoCalMusicLover]

26. But If You Don't Vote For Him, A Repub Might Win

That's what you'll basically be told.

Sorry, my vote is important, and I'm not going to waste it on someone who has turned out to be a liar.

I'll still vote, but will leave the presidential box blank.

[limpyhobbler]

41. I'll still vote for him. The alternative is much worse.

But I do wish there were more of a choice. That's why the 2-party system stinks.

If it's a choice between horrible and meh. I'll take meh.

I actually do support Obama but I also don't like being taken for granted. But it's the natural result of our two party system.

[think]

21. Obama walks into a war zone and states LAW ENFORCEMENT is the answer

[Ken Burch]

23. The stupid thing here is, the William Bennett types he's trying to appease with this stance

would NEVER vote for him anyway, no matter what. He could publicly behead every pothead in the country and he wouldn't win those people over. Why can't he see that?

This is what happens when moderate liberals make a fetish out of "toughness".

[Mimosa]

53. ^ Exactly. ^ n/t

[AndyTiedye]

24. The War on Drugs is the Most Sacred Cow in Washington

They'll cut the defense budget before they'd think of cutting the war on drugs.
They'll end Social Security before they'd consider cutting the war on drugs.

[pscot]

25. The President really has his head up his butt

on this one.

[abelenkpe]

28. Really?

I thought alcohol prohibition in the early 1900s was the reason that the mafia grew so strong, corruption permeated every level of justice, gang violence and crime was at an all time high? And that citizens who had previously supported prohibition joined with others in asking government to repeal prohibition. That it helped to reduce crime. What's different today?

[bluedigger]

29. Well, we did manage to outsource most of the associated violence.

Unless you live in New Orleans, or Chicago, or LA, or DC, or... what was the question again?

Good post.

[think]

30. +1 Nice rebuttal

[EFerrari]

33. What's different today? They globalized IranContra

and no one in government really gives a damn what the population supports as long as the PrisonIndustrialComplex is clocking profits.

[newspeak]

60. yeah, iran-contra

had no problem putting drugs on our streets during that debacle. Of course, maybe they thought it would increase the prison population and get rid of some of the undesirables. Oh wait, if your rich and doing coke, you'll maybe just get a hand slap.

My biggest problem about the so called war on drugs is the number of INNOCENT people who have been murdered or have had their houses torn up. I remember in college, one guy, real red neck, came to class in shock. He lived outside of town, law enforcement found MJ about two miles from his house. They came, busted down the door, tore up their house, scared the shite out of him and his wife (they had them kneel on the floor with guns pointing at them). Cops found absolutely nothing. He on the other hand, had an epiphany about his country and his real rights. This guy was pure red, white and blue and couldn't imagine they'd do something like that to him.

Awhile back, I had a book (let someone borrow it and didn't get it back) describing incidents of people who were murdered because of the "war on drugs." And, to me, those forfeiture laws were nothing but allowing corruption. It's really interesting that the one elderly man who had property buttressed up to the LA forest was shot dead for alleged MJ in his back yard. No MJ-the man had just gone through eye surgery and they busted down his door and killed him in front of his wife.

[EFerrari]

61. The drug war is so pre-9/11 thinking.

They don't need a reason to bust your door down any more or a warrant to tap your phone or even probable cause to arrest you -- unless you are connected to the Florida status quo. This is now a different country where police ride tanks in the streets and where any of us can be picked up if the government doesn't like who we hang with.

[Gregorian]

31. Stop listening to advisers, and do the right thing!

That goes for the Pentagon too.

But you'd probably not last long that way, unfortunately.

[EFerrari]

32. 'He said the responsibility also rests with countries that are big destinations for the drugs

to reduce demand for illegal narcotics."

Incarcerating Americans in private prisons will not reduce demand for illegal drugs.

Obama drug policy is an inconsistent train wreck unless you are Big Pharma or Big Prisons.

For them, it works beautifully.

[bluedigger]

36. Especially if you are Wells Fargo!

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002553981

[EFerrari]

37. Yep. So none of this has anything to do with drugs

but with elaborate money laundering.

[SunSeeker]

35. Sigh. He knows he's wrong. He's not an idiot. He just doesn't want to pick this battle.

It's just like gun control. He doesn't want to touch it with a ten foot pole. Unfortunately, independents and soccer moms want to keep drugs illegal, and that's who he needs to be re-elected. But I still hold out hope that some day, after he's re-elected, it will be pot that's legal and not AK-47s.

[cstanleytech]

43. Not to mention without the support of both houses he cant overturn the federal laws regarding

narcotics he would be slitting his own throat politically and really does anyone here believe that he is likely to get the votes to pass such legislation? Because frankly I dont think its likely at all, in fact its so unlikely that I am willing to bet that I will win the powerball before it happens.

[SunSeeker]

47. Yup. Like so many things on our (and his) wish list.

That's why we ALL need to vote. Get dems in office. Then, we can propose these changes. It's just not going to happen otherwise.

[Mimosa]

54. Not true...

Independents tend to support legalization of marijuana. Look it up.

[SunSeeker]

64. In blue CA, only 46% of voters favored legal pot in 2010.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/should-the-us-legalize-hard-drugs/2012/04/11/gIQAX95QBT_story.html
Of course, the support of legal hard drugs is even lower. Got any links to prove me wrong?

[Mimosa]

71. More independents and conservatives are for liberalizing drug laws.

I am not a marijuana smoker. Nor do I do illegal drugs. But for 30 years I've kept up with how Americans have been responding to polls. I've known all kinds of people through the years. The most conservative people I've known have been more prone to be the ones saying government ought to stay out of people's personal choices. Many Democratic female voters I've known are content with the status quo.

http://norml.org/library/item/favorable-medical-marijuana-polls

From Independent Voter Network:

Pat Robertson, televangelist, thinks it's time to revisit drug laws.

http://ivn.us/2012/03/09/televangelist-pat-robertson-says-legalize-marijuana/

[SunSeeker]

85. So why isn't pot legal in Mississippi?

And seriously? The "most conservative people" are "more prone to be the ones saying government ought to stay out of people's personal choices"?! I'd ask the "Vaginal Probe" Governor of Virginia about that one.

[drokhole]

38. In related news, food not answer to hunger.

[Zhade]

39. Then you, sir, are a fucking idiot.

Yes, by all means let's continue with failed policies. Oh, and don't make me laugh with your conditional support of the rule of law -- assassination of American citizens is a-okay, right?

[cstanleytech]

44. I agree the policy has failed and will likely continue to fail however that doesnt make him an

idiot, if he was then he would have said he supported abolishing the laws and then come Nov we would have Mitt Romney as president.

[Comrade Grumpy]

40. I tend not to vote for guys who want to throw me in jail.

[SunSeeker]

48. So you'll vote for no one and let Romney win? nt

[Comrade Grumpy]

52. I live in a state that won't be in play. I have the luxury of considering third party candidates.

Neither Roseanne Barr nor New Mexico ex-Gov. Gary Johnson, or former Salt Lake City Mayor Rocky Anderson want to throw me in jail over the drug war. Maybe if there are enough protest votes for folks like that, the big parties will begin to listen.

This is not an endorsement for any particular candidate or party.

[Mimosa]

72. The hoary 'good cop, bad cop' tactic again

They've been playing us for decades.

'Where are you going to go? You going to vote for that dastardly devil? *bwahaha*

[SunSeeker]

87. So you'll vote for some 3rd party and get Romney elected?

That would show this "hoary good cops"! And sure, drugs will get legalized under the guy who won't even drink beer.

[Mimosa]

93. Living in fear isn't living

Risk nothing, gain nothing. There haven't been any really good third party candidates since Ross Perot's first run for President.

Both parties have a financial interest in suppressing third parties.

[krispos42]

42. Well, the cartels certainly want strict drug laws in America. n/t

[handmade34]

46. ...

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/ending-the-never-ending-war-on-drugs
Fernando Henrique Cardoso...President of Brazil (1995-2003)

"SAO PAULO – The war on drugs is a lost war, and 2011 is the time to move away from a punitive approach in order to pursue a new set of policies based on public health, human rights, and common sense. These were the core findings of the Latin American Commission on Drugs and Democracy that I convened, together with former presidents Ernesto Zedillo of Mexico and César Gaviria of Colombia...
After 30 years of massive effort, all prohibitionism has achieved is to shift areas of cultivation and drug cartels from one country to another (the so-called balloon effect). Latin America remains the world’s largest exporter of cocaine and marijuana. Thousands of young people continue to lose their lives in gang wars. Drug lords rule by fear over entire communities...
...At the end of the day, the capacity of people to evaluate risks and make informed choices will be as important to regulating the use of drugs as more humane and efficient laws and policies. Yes, drugs erode people’s freedom. But it is time to recognize that repressive policies towards drug users, rooted as they are in prejudice, fear, and ideology, may be no less a threat to liberty."

[bluedigger]

50. Beating the Drug-War Addiction

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001 paradoxically reinforced the US military’s focus on countering illicit drug traffickers. While other US forces became heavily involved in the “war on terrorism,” USSOUTHCOM scaled up its “war on drugs,” with its commanders targeting the industry’s bosses in the Andes, Mexico, and Central America.
That happened in part because, following 9/11, Latin America was the only region of the world that did not witness an attack by transnational terrorists linked to al-Qaeda, so there seemed to be little need to pursue counter-terrorist activity there. And, with the US continuing to be the world’s largest market for illegal drugs, its leaders’ focus on the drug war in Latin America does not appear misguided, at least not on the surface.
That focus has not only made USSOUTHCOM a major recipient of federal funds, but has also turned it into something akin to an autonomous drug-fighting agency. From the region’s perspective, USSOUTHCOM appears to be a vaguely “independent” military arm of US policymakers’ global anti-drug strategy, with scant accountability or congressional oversight, and with significant resources for aggressive anti-drug operations.
Indeed, USSOUTHCOM has controlled 75% of the more than $12 billion that the US government has allocated to anti-drug activities in Latin America and the Caribbean since 2000. But, despite this expensive military campaign, all evidence shows that the “war on drugs” has been a fiasco.

http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/beating-the-drug-war-addiction

Thanks for posting that handmade34. I found the above at the same source. It looks like there is a lot of good reading there!

[rayofreason]

55. Legalization is PART of the answer, but not all of it, n/t

[randome]

66. I'd say decriminalization but not legalization.

And treatment centers instead of prison for those who need it.

Legalization will not make the drug cartels give up and get office jobs.

[Fumesucker]

74. Treatment centers for pot?

You do know it's far less addictive than alcohol or nicotine, right?

[bamacrat]

56. We already have a successful study of the effectiveness of legalization..

We ended prohibition. Mob violence fell over night, businesses sprung up all over to support this new industry, revenue flowed to local, state and federal coffers. Why make some drugs (tobacco, alcohol, caffeine etc) legal while making other less harmful substances illegal? Makes no sense for a modern, world leading nation to trail so many other in what I feel is a human rights issue more so than a getting high and having a good time issue.

[JonLP24]

57. Neither is the current plan

I imagine the "answer" is step up funding, beef up LE, and increase sentences(which increases violence).

[GeorgeGist]

58. Really Mr. Obama.

Don't you get dizzy engaging in circular logic?

[unionworks]

59. I'm not going to bother

Making excuses for endorsing wrong policy anymore. And he knows damn well it's wrong.

[Akoto]

63. On an election year, any other answer would be idiocy.

If he tried to get something through Congress, he would be stonewalled. None of the representatives would want to take that kind of political gamble. It'd be slitting his own throat just before an election, as someone said.

Then, you get the Republicans pouncing on it. I can already hear the swarm of TV commercials.

"President Obama says that he wants to legalize deadly drugs and put them in our pharmacies. Do you want crack prescribed to your children? Paid for by Republicans for Bigotry in Elections."

[SunSeeker]

68. Exactly. He can't get congress to pass infrastructure improvements. Legal heroin? Pfft.

We couldn't even get innocuous marijuana legalized here in California as a ballot initiative in 2010--only 46% of Californians voted for it. This Obama bashing is just want the Repukes want. It makes me sick.

[Mimosa]

73. So, you're saying the President is too weak to get anything done...

So...tell me why I should vote for him? Because I'm so scared of what could happen?

Well, let me tell you I've no health insurance, no access to health care and no prospects. The wars continue, the economy sucks, the Patriot Act is enshrined as law.

[SunSeeker]

86. Ever heard of something called a filibuster?

Sheesh. The ACA doesn't kick in until 2014 for most adults. You think ANYTHING would be kicking in in 2014 if McCain won. Why are you repeating "the President is too weak" ring wing meme? What have you done to support him?

[joshcryer]

78. I think marijuana legalization will happen in quite a few states this year.

It's going to be fun times.

[Comrade Grumpy]

83. It's already on the ballot in Colorado and Washington.

Signature-gathering drives with a chance to make it are still ongoing in Oregon and Montana.

[joshcryer]

84. Yep, I'm in Colorado. It's well done. Isn't CA trying again, too?

edit: I say "it's well done" because the PR behind it is great. They call it, for cryin' out loud, the "Regulate Marijuana Like Alcohol" act.

[Comrade Grumpy]

90. It's not going to happen in California this year.

There are four differerent legalization initiatives, but none of them have the money to hire signature-gatherers to get enough signatures to make the ballot. It costs between $1 million and $2 million to run a signature-gathering campaign in California.

There are also ongoing efforts in Idaho, Michigan, Missouri, and Nebraska, but they look unlikely to make the ballot, either.

Oregon and Montana could still make it.

[rusty fender]

65. We are winning the war on drugs and the war in Afghanistan

Can't you see that?

[Kablooie]

75. it worked for prohibition.

[joshcryer]

77. I honestly don't believe he believes that.

He can't be that stupid.

If President Obama was caught with drugs back when he was using he wouldn't be President Obama. He'd likely have had to endure the Prison Industrial Complex which disproportionately affects young black men.

[Mimosa]

79. ^ True^ Luck of the draw. ^

I think of all the young men in jails.

[Fumesucker]

80. It would have improved his life greatly if he had been busted..

He would have gotten the treatment he so desperately needed for his drug abuse..

Who knows, he might be the assistant shift manager at a Taco Bell by now, the sky's the limit when you've been properly treated for your drug abuse.

President Obama is a strong Christian, commanded to abjure hypocrisy by his eponymous Savior, there is no way he would ever force other people to endure something he didn't think was good for himself or his family.

[joshcryer]

81. I know you're being cheeky / sarcastic. But seriously? He'd be dead...

...or serving a long sentence. All because of being caught with drugs at one point.

And I refuse to believe he doesn't know that.

I would admit that this would be more of a wedge issue than an executive order for ENDA-style protections at the federal level, so I can understand the political nature of it. But he could still be honest and say "I think legalization can reduce crime if done properly but I do not believe there is a political atmosphere for it in my country, and my country is the largest buyer of drugs, so unfortunately Latin America, at least until the American people decide to instate these regulations, will have to endure our overwhelming consumption of Latin drug exports."

Just more bullshit political calculation and making him out to be a liar (which all politicians are, including Obama). I just hope my sig pans out but I'm not counting on it.

[Fumesucker]

82. Obama's Christian beliefs are so strong they inform his policy choice on gay marriage..

His Christian beliefs inform him that gay marriage is not "sanctified" like heterosexual marriage, Bluenorthwest has been very good at pointing this out.

The peculiar thing is that the Christ never once mentioned homosexuality while He spoke often about the evils of the Hypocrites, more often in fact than about any other group of sinners.

It's infuriating and insulting when someone lies to you and you both know the score, it means they have no respect for you or your intelligence.

[E-Z-B]

89. This is more than about growing your own pot.

Does everyone support legalizing meth as well?

[cyberpj]

91. LOL! Good thing he already cashed Bill Maher's check! nt