Obama "Will Pivot to the Drug War" in Second Term, Claim Anonymous White House Sources

Marc Ambinder reports in GQ that Obama will turn his attention to the drug war if re-elected. There's not a lot of meat to this scoop

According to ongoing discussions with Obama aides and associates, if the president wins a second term, he plans to tackle another American war that has so far been successful only in perpetuating more misery: the four decades of The Drug War.

Don't expect miracles. There is very little the president can do by himself. And pot-smokers shouldn't expect the president to come out in favor of legalizing marijuana. But from his days as a state senator in Illinois, Obama has considered the Drug War to be a failure, a conflict that has exacerbated the problem of drug abuse, devastated entire communities, changed policing practices for the worse, and has led to a generation of young children, disproportionately black and minority, to grow up in dislocated homes, or in none at all.

Since the United Ststes isn't about to legalize or regulate the illegal narcotics markets, the best thing a president can do may be what Obama winds up doing if he gets re-elected: using the bully pulpit to draw attention to the issue.

But he won't do so before November.

This report makes me wonder if Ambinder has been following Gil Kerlikowske's tour in promotion of Obama's 2012 Drug Control Strategy Report. You see, the White House is already claiming to have been doing some pretty revolutionary stuff on the drug war front (even though it's not actually doing anything helpful). See "How the Obama Administration Plans to Convince Progressives That it Ended the War on Drugs," and "If Obama Really Believes Drug Addiction Is a Disease, Not a Moral Failing, Why Is He Putting Sick People In Prison?"

In fact, I think it's more likely Ambinder got spun. Law Enforcement Against Prohibition thinks the same thing

Sounds exciting, but don't be fooled by the big headline because the piece itself contains zero details about what the administration allegedly has in mind. A skeptical observer could easily come away from reading this piece thinking that administration/campaign people who recognize the drug war's vast political unpopularity are being somewhat disingenuous with Ambinder.  

Obama -- as candidate and as president -- and his drug czar have already repeatedly talked about scaling back the war on drugs.  But it's been all talk.  Drug Czar Kerlikowske, in his very first interview with the Wall Street Journal after taking office, declared the end of the "war on drugs" terminology.  He has repeatedly said that this is a health and not just a crime issue.  But the problem is: the drug control budget still overwhelmingly devotes more resources to old, failed punishment strategies than effective treatment and prevention strategies.  The rhetoric doesn't match the reality.

So while Ambinder's story says the administration will use the "bully pulpit" to talk about this issue in the second term, they have already done so in the first term.  Sure, maybe the president himself could do more to forcefully champion this debate, but absent any real policy action it's not going to make a difference in the real medical problem of substance abuse, and it's not going to impress anyone. 

LEAP also points out that Ambinder is flat-out wrong about Obama's inability to change drug policy unilaterally. The president can, in fact, institute a change of scheduling for marijuana. He can also prioritize federal law enforcement resources (as he's done with young immigrants) as well as pardon federally convicted drug offenders. Ambinder really did get spun. 

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • ||

    Anybody who believes this is retarded.

  • Pro Libertate||

    I don't know, that might be an insult to those who have physiological handicaps in intelligence.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Then Roberts must believe it.

  • Whiterun Guard||

    Maybe they're just high.

  • deified||

    very high.

  • Montani Semper Liberi||

    Please don't insult retards by comparing them to Obama supporters. I am friends with retarded people, and they would never vote for him. Thanks.

  • ||

    ^^THIS^^

  • CE||

    This probably means he will start sending drones and Seal teams to wipe out drug dealers and users and medicinal herb dispensaries, even if they comply with state laws.

  • SugarFree||

    AND UNICORNS!

  • tarran||

    Which one of the regulars actually predicted he was going to try this bullshit "come back to me, baby, this time it will be different; I won't smack you around anymore" ploy?

    Kudos to him or her for calling it.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Vote for Ike Turner: Because this time, he's sorry, bitch.

  • Brett L||

    It's that goddamn Johnson.

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Heh heh.

  • Pro Libertate||

    He loves you much more than those other guys, baby. Yeah, he loses his temper and occasionally lets fly his hand of justice, but that's only because he cares so much. Come here, baby, and give Obama some love.

  • SugarFree||

    I think the question is, who didn't predict this? I know the list would be shorter.

  • John||

    And even that list would only include MNG, Tony and Joe who deny he was ever bad on the drug war in the first place.

  • CE||

    Or maybe he's worried about Gary Johnson...

  • John||

    One has to wonder. I would like to think that civil libertarians in significant numbers have some integrity. But I doubt it.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    libertarians in significant numbers

    ...

  • Pro Libertate||

    No libertarian in his right mind is voting for Obama. So if you think you're a libertarian and plan to vote for him, you are (1) insane and/or (2) not a libertarian.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I have to admit that right now I'm so pissed off about the SC ruling/reactions that I want to vote Romney just to stick it to the liberals. Hopefully that passes soon so I can vote Johnson instead of voting out of spite.

  • Pro Libertate||

    It's made Romney seem less appalling, but I'm still voting for Johnson.

    I'd really like to see some major political backlash over this stupid law and stupid decision.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Romney doesn't seem any less appalling, I just want to do whatever is gonna piss off Obamacare supporters the most.

  • Pro Libertate||

    Maximize Their Pain: Vote Schadenfreude.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I really wish there was an option to just use a negative vote. So instead of voting for Romney, I'd vote a -1 to Obama.

  • Pro Libertate||

    A few weeks ago, I suggested that there should be a negative vote for each candidate in an election. So I could give each a negative vote or just give one all of my negative votes.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    I was envisioning that it would be in place of your one vote, but yours might work too.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Romney IS less appalling, but that's not enough.

  • deified||

    The pro-Johnson forces are looking sickly and weak.

    Go and show 'em some moxy.

    www.reddit.com/r/GaryJohnson

  • Proprietist||

    While I'd agree no "libertarian" libertarian would ever vote for Obama or Romney, many civil libertarian lefties will vote for Obama because he seems marginally less bad than Romney on civil liberties, just like many economically libertarian righties will vote for Romney because he seems marginally less bad than Obama on economics. Of course, these are completely about impressions and empty promises than fact-based actualizations. That's why Obama is leaking flirtations to the civil libertarians in the Left base.

  • John||

    LOL Wow does Obama think Libertarians are stupid. He must have had dinner with Will Wilkerson or something.

  • Cytotoxic||

    +

  • Hugh Akston||

    Didn't Nixon also promise a super secret plan to end Vietnam that he would only reveal if he won a second term?

  • Brett L||

    In fairness, the war did end during that time period.

  • Almanian's Evil Twin||

    Rambo told me the war NEVER ended.

  • Brett L||

    "Can we win this time?"

  • ||

    "I went on a manhunt once. I just got back from Nam. I was hitchhiking through Oregon. Next thing I know there's a bunch of cops chasing after me through the woods! I had to take them all out, it was a bloodbath!"

  • Srynerson||

    I don't think Nixon said who would win under his plan....

  • CockGobbla||

    Maybe he will make a change in a hypothetical "second" term, but if the issue was really important to him and if he were a decent human being, he shouldn't even be able to get a decent moment's rest until he did something about it.

  • Drake||

    If he loses the election, he'll go back to smoking lots of dope with his buddies in Hawaii while telling them how he was about to legalize it all.

  • deified||

    [slow clap]

  • John||

    Libertarian, hopefully won't believe this. But you know who might? Socons. This ought to get the SOCONs real riled up about Obama's secret hippie Muslim second term plans.

  • juris imprudent||

    secret hippie Muslim

    The resurrection of the Rainbow Jihad?

  • NoTalentAssclown||

    This is the definition of cowardice

  • Brett L||

    "C'mon Charlie Brown, kick the football."

  • T o n y||

    Elect Obama and a healthy Democratic majority to Congress, and it's possible something will be done about the Drug War. Otherwise, forget about it. And that's all you really need to know.

    Commence pointless bitching.

  • John||

    Just commit to national bankruptcy and the loss of every other single freedom you have and maybe your knew Dem overlords will legalize pot. That sounds like a heck of an offer there Tony.

  • T o n y||

    And self-serving partisan hyperbole.

  • John||

    In fairness you will be free to commit sodomy and get abortions. Every other aspect of your life down to the size of your slurpee to the slopes on your favorite miniture golf course to what your children eat for lunch will be strictly controlled from Washington. But you might, if you are nice maybe get to smoke pot, provided your employer doesn't test for it.

    Again, I can't understand how anyone wouldn't vote Democrat.

  • T o n y||

    I wouldn't vote for them either if what you posted had any connection with the reality of this universe whatsoever.

  • John||

    Tony don't you read Reason? Last week the feds came out and dictated the slopes on minituare golf courses under the ADA. Bloomburg and the first lady want to limit the size and availability of sugary drinks, expensive wine excluded of course. And in North Carolina kids are being told they can't bring their own lunches anymore because they don't meet federal standards.

    What was that about reality?

  • T o n y||

    I'll give you mini-golf, but I happen to be in favor of public accommodations being accessible to the disabled. The North Carolina thing has nothing to do with Democrats.

    But in reality those are small prices to pay to avoid another Middle East quagmire, major recession, or any other doubling down of the many Bush catastrophes. Republicans have not moderated since then, you know.

  • R C Dean||

    But in reality those are small prices to pay to avoid another Middle East quagmire, major recession, or any other doubling down of the many Bush catastrophes.

    Funny, I thought we were getting both micromanagement from DC and yuor parade of horribles, all at the same time.

  • T||

    But in reality those are small prices to pay to avoid another Middle East quagmire, major recession, or any other doubling down of the many Bush catastrophes.

    Maybe I missed something, but didn't we get EXACTLY this under your guy?

  • ||

    I'll give you mini-golf, but I happen to be in favor of public accommodations being accessible to the disabled.

    If handicapped people want boring, flat mini-golf courses, they can build their own. STOP FUCKING UP MY ANNUAL BIRTHDAY CELEBRATION!

  • oncogenesis||

    I'll give you mini-golf, but I happen to be in favor of public accommodations being accessible to the disabled.

    Of course. Because if just one wheelchair guy can't play mini-golf somewhere in America, then we are not truly civilized.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    You do understand that the ADA dictates the acceptable slopes of miniature golf course holes and the length of the blades of the artificial turf they can use, right?

    So, who ya gonna vote for instead, now?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Well, you'll be able to commit sodomy as long as you use organic, fair trade lube.

  • John||

    IN strictly rationed amounts so as to keep your carbon footprint down.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    There is also the "not having straight sex" tax.

  • Zeb||

    Sodomy's not a crime anymore, so I think you can just do it without having to commit it.

  • R C Dean||

    Gosh, if only we'd had Obama and a healthy Democratic majority in Congress before now . . . .

  • Auric Demonocles||

    It wasn't healthy! How could it be, without universal healthcare?

  • T o n y||

    Hey, this report is the ONLY evidence that anyone on either side is even considering tackling the Drug War. I know that people like you who believe everything that comes down the GOP talking points wire think that Democrats had carte blanche in 2009, but they were dealing with a massive economic crisis and got to healthcare as a policy priority, pushing climate change and other major priorities off the table.

    Republicans have not been shy about passing purely symbolic legislation in the House, so when was the last Drug War bill they offered up? Or are you waiting around for the emergence of a libertarian majority coalition in the year five thousand and never?

  • R C Dean||

    I know that people like you who believe everything that comes down the GOP talking points wire

    Poor Tony. Trapped in his binary, Manichean world, where nothing exists except Dems and Reps, in eternal opposition to each other . . . .

  • T o n y||

    US politics is strictly binary. I don't like it, but that's the way it is. Don't agree? Why don't you be the first to take my long-standing $10,000 wager that either Democrats or Republicans will be elected president and to a majority in Congress.

  • R C Dean||

    US politics is strictly binary.

    Structurally, maybe. But that's not what we were talking about.

  • Zeb||

    When given the option of being punched in the nose or kicked in the balls, I like to at least ask for something else.

  • John||

    So the Drug war is a push. That leaves every other reason to vote against Obama in tact. And Obama had his chance and was willing to commit political suicide to pay off the insurance companies and take over health care. But he wasn't willing to so much as stop raids on medical marijuana dispensaries.

    So no Tony, Obama may in fact care even less about ending t he drug war than the Republicans do. Go sell stupid somewhere else. We are all full up.

  • T o n y||

    You don't have to tell me Republicans are at the stupidity saturation point. Nothing would please me more than for Mitt Romney or John Boehner to come out strong in favor of drug law liberalization. Why don't you hold your breath while waiting on that one?

    I'm not saying either side is guaranteed to make major progress, but only one side has the remotest interest.

  • ||

    Does anything serve to refresh the tree of liberty quite so effectively as the putrid blood of a progressive slavemaker?

  • John||

    I am sure the SEIU who now funds the entire Democratic Party is so interested in its prison guards and cops losing their jobs. The Democrats are dependent on the prison industrial complex for cash. They have less of a reason to end the drug war than the Republicans do.

  • ||

    John, knowledge is venom to this guy. Your calories would be more productively expended skipping on the spot for months without end.

  • PapayaSF||

    This counts as "evidence," eh? If we can't believe the pledges Obama made during speeches, why should an anonymous source carry any weight at all?

  • T o n y||

    I don't know, why don't you pointlessly bitch some more and see what that accomplishes?

  • Cytotoxic||

    Why don't you dodge some more Toney? Oh wait that's exactly what you'll do.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Won't matter. The Fed has The States by the short hairs. Plus, Commerce Clause.

    And Fuck You, That's Why.

    Also, fried chicken.

  • Zeb||

    The federal government isn't going to do shit on the drug war. But states are doing some things. Here in NH, the republican controlled legislature has passed decrim and medical pot laws in the past few years. They were vetoed by the Democratic governor. So there's that.

  • John Thacker||

    Republicans have not been shy about passing purely symbolic legislation in the House, so when was the last Drug War bill they offered up?

    The last Drug War bill offered up was one that got about 95 votes in the Senate to ban "bath salts," and was only held up for a few months because of Sen. Rand Paul's opposition.

    I don't see how that demonstrates that the Democrats are any better.

    On some issues, like say sugar subsidies, one can imagine that maybe, just maybe, Republicans would eliminate it if they had a few more votes, since over two-thirds of them vote to eliminate them (along with about one-thirds of Democrats.)

    But on the Drug War? A Senate with 100% Democrats, you'd still only find about 10 against the Drug War at most.

  • Almanian's Evil Twin||

    Shorter Choney: ------------

  • CockGobbla||

    Hold hundreds of thousands of black teens hostage until you give our party complete control?

  • Citizen Nothing||

    Do what he say! Do what he say!

  • Ska||

    Picked that up at Duane Reade for six bucks yesterday...

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Elect Obama and a healthy Democratic majority to Congress, and it's possible something will be done about the Drug War. Otherwise, forget about it. And that's all you really need to know.

    That's one plan (the sucky one). The better is if you elect me, on January 21st, I'm padlocking the doors of DEA, BATFE and DHS, seizing every document in the place and setting my Justice Department to poring over everything with a fine-tooth comb.

    Heads will roll, tears will be salty, and lulz will ensue.

  • ||

    God damn I didn't think it was possible for you to be any more stupid. Then you say something like this.

    You are a fucking idiot to vote for a fourth term of President Bush. And make no mistake, Obama has continued and expanded every single one of Bush's failed and discredited policies and did nothing for the groups he is now pandering to, even when he had the opportunity, because he was too busy sucking the dicks of the insurance and pharmaceutical companies.

  • juris imprudent||

    I'd be tempted to try whatever it is you're consuming T o n y, but judging by you it appears the effects aren't temporary.

  • Enyap||

    "Elect Obama and a healthy Democratic majority to Congress"

    We had that for 2 fucking years dumbass.

  • ||

    And pot-smokers shouldn't expect the president to come out in favor of legalizing marijuana.

    HAHAHAHAHAHA

    What a worm.

  • Brett L||

    "Yeah, baby. Of course I love you. I just, well, I want to take you out in public so bad, but my, uh, ex, is like a bitter shrew and she'd figure out a way to use it against me on child support. So how 'bout I just come over to your place like usual? And, yeah, before you ask, I can't stay tonight."

  • Almanian's Evil Twin||

    I have no idea what's goin' on.

    Anyone here wanna get high?

  • Citizen Nothing||

    You're the worst character ever, Almanian's ET.

  • Serf||

    He knows.

  • ||

  • ||

    Stupid tat, nice ass.

  • ||

    Not a fan of ink, eh?

  • ||

    Ink is like writing "TRASH" on your forehead.

  • ||

    Tramp stamps are fine as an indicator of sluttiness, but big tattoos on women mostly just look stupid.

  • John||

    I agree with Warty.

  • ||

    The worst is the chest tattoo. Fucking just stop it already, girls.

  • John||

    Yup. the chick from American Pickers could punch quite well for the over 30 mom class except for the tatts. She has the worst ones on her chest.

    http://starcasm.net/archives/75584

  • ||

    Yeah, John, you can call me a homo all day, but even without tattoos, she ain't punching anything well.

  • John||

    She is cute. She is not model cute. But she kind of works in her own way on the months her weight is down.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    That chick sometimes looks good... except for the egregious tattoo that has the added benefit of making her look like she has jaundice.

  • Ska||

    I think tats on the American Pickers chick work in her favor. If you put them on the redhead from Mythbusters it would fuck her up. If you take them off the chick from AP she would just look old.

    The blonde chick that shows up on Mythbusters every now and then has a lot of tats, but I think they look good on her, too.

  • John||

    I think the Myth Busters redhead is cute. I don't get the "OMG she is gorgeous" take on her. I wouldn't kick her out of bed. But I don't get the attention she gets at all.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    She's on a geek show so she gets a disproportionate amount of attention. She's nice looking but certainly not enough to put up with veganism and the rest of the crap that no doubt comes as part of that package.

  • John||

    If she is a vegan she better look like Bar Rafeli.

  • R C Dean||

    I think the Myth Busters redhead is cute.

    I caught part of the episode where they armor a car with phone books.

    She is quite a good shot. And handles a .50 Barrett without breaking a sweat. I don't know if "cute" is quite praise enough.

  • John||

    She is a Vegan RC. Give it 24 hours of her whining and you would be using that .50 cal on yourself.

  • ||

    The blonde chick that shows up on Mythbusters every now and then has a lot of tats, but I think they look good on her, too.

    Enh. The Asian dyke they replaced her with is cuter.

  • ||

    I haven't watched Mythbusters in quite some time, but Carrie is fucking cute.

  • John||

    That trick never works. And yes she is cute. She is just not gorgeous. And her show should have been canceled five years ago. How many fucking myths are their bust for Christ's sake?

  • ||

    And her show should have been canceled five years ago

    I disagree. How can you get tired of watching adorable redheads blow things up?

  • ||

    She's more adorable than hot. She's no Alison Brie, who's maxed out both.

  • John||

    But for every time she blows something up, you have to watch the bald ginger dude with the stupid hat. And she isn't adorable enough to make up for that.

  • ||

    Allison Brie pretty much took both those crowns. I feel sorry for Gillian Jacobs, who is pretty fucking hot in her own right, for having to play second fiddle to Brie.

  • NoVAHockey||

    there are other women on community besides Allison Brie?

  • John||

    I think Brie is by far the best of all of the Mad Men chicks. I would take her over Hendricks in a minute.

  • Ska||

    Is that Don Draper's latest wife, the former receptionist one? Because she (the Quebecois one) is amazing.

  • SugarFree||

    It's Pete's wife, who is much hotter than the show lets her be.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Elisabeth Moss
    Because my hierarchy has always gone "Brunettes, Redheads, Blondes"

    Christina Hendricks

    Tig. Ol. Bitties.

  • Randian||

    I'll say it: Christina Hendricks is too top-heavy.

  • ||

    You take that back.

  • Randian||

    You take that back.

    I will not. They make her look especially bad on Mad Men.

  • Zeb||

    The biggest problem with big tattoos on women (especially on the upper body) is that the sort of woman/girl who gets them will probably be fat and/or knocked up by some time in her early 20s and those tattoos won't be the shape or size they were intended to be.

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Kinda fat and floppy looking.

  • ||

    Fat and floppy-looking? Wow. To each his own... interpretation, I guess.

    http://s13.postimage.org/hl5deqdo5/1140.jpg

    Better?

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    Yes.

  • John||

    Thank God at least someone likes the female form. Care RPA, sarcasmic will call you a fatty lover for that pic.

  • ||

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    That's pretty nice right there.

  • Ska||

    Too artistic and high maintenance. ;)

  • Anonymous Coward||

    I want to bounce quarters off of those.

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    Stupid tat, nice ass.

    She had a tat? I had to look again to see that.

  • ||

    My entry.

  • ||

    That is a superb ass.

  • Hugh Akston||

    Well, I don't need to hear any more. I'm sold. After all, the Great Leader's previous pivot seemed to work out pretty well.

  • ||

    Wait, so what you're saying is that Barack Hussein Obama is among the top 5 worst presidents ever? I agree. Mr. Zenith of Incompetence!

  • Brett L||

    OTOH, flying cars are now real, if experimental.

  • ||

    Is this what's commonly known in these lands as "SugarFree'd"?

  • Brett L||

    Sonofabitch. try now

  • ||

    If you can get that thing to look like a Mustang, I'm in!

  • John||

    SFed the link

  • Fist of Etiquette||

    This is a slimy thing to do, and it won't work. The energized youth vote is a thing of the past.

  • ant1sthenes||

    Does pot legalization really reach out to the energized youth vote, or is it more for the laid back youth vote?

  • John||

    This is cool

    Graphene once again proves that it is quite possibly the most miraculous material known to man, this time by making saltwater drinkable. The process was developed by a group of MIT researchers who realized that graphene allowed for the creation of an incredibly precise sieve. Basically, the regular atomic structure of graphene means that you can create holes of any size, for example the size of a single molecule of water. Using this process scientist can desalinate saltwater 1,000 times faster than the Reverse Osmosis technique.

  • John||

    That is on slashdot, which the spam filter doesn't like.

  • Cytotoxic||

    That is cool. Carbon is pretty amazing you can do whatever you want with it. Your fireplace soot probably contains a bunch of nanotubes and (maybe?) buckballs.

  • John||

    Practical desalination would be the biggest life enhancing invention since the Green Revolution.

  • ||

    But would it be just as reviled by the greens? Obviously, but I'm having a hard time imagining just what they would have against it.

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    But would it be just as reviled by the greens? Obviously, but I'm having a hard time imagining just what they would have against it.

    Once the filters are used, you have to dispose of them. Salt laden filters, the horror.

  • ||

    It will affect the specific gravity of the oceans, obviously. Oh, they'll dump the salt back in? Salt is bad for you!

  • ¿Ex Nihilo?||

    It will affect the specific gravity of the oceans, obviously. Oh, they'll dump the salt back in? Salt is bad for you!

    Exacerbating the specific gravity even more. And think of the fish kill that would bring about.

  • Zeb||

    It would create a lot of brine that has to be disposed of. Seems like a manageable problem.

  • R C Dean||

    Especially for a plant right next to the frickin' ocean.

  • db||

    Haha you've never been in volved in designing and permitting a water treatment plant have you? Think you can just backwas the stuff you filtered out of the river water back into the river? Oh, no no no no.

  • Randian||

    well, you're gonna kill all the saltwater fish, for one, so that's probably a pretty big deal.

  • ||

    The ultimate environmental consequences could be quite drastic. Not being apocalyptic. Just sayin' that pulling massive amounts of water out of the ocean to irrigate massive amounts of land will certainly lead to consequences of some sort. Positive or negative? No idea.

    It seems though like they'd have a real problem with salt clogging the system. I wonder how they'll keep the filters clean?

  • John||

    Last I looked that whole conservation of mass thing would solve that issue. So what if it gets taken out of the ocean? It will eventually work its way back. No amount humans ever take out of the ocean would be any more than a tiny fraction of what evaporates every day.

  • Sudden||

    Well, what if we pitched it as a way to counteract the alleged rising of sea levels courtesy of AGW?

  • sarcasmic||

    Carbon is pretty amazing you can do whatever you want with it.

    What are you talking about?

    Carbon is sin!

    Carbon is death!

    Planet killer!

  • ant1sthenes||

    Well, that's one global crisis averted. Also, good news for the seasteaders.

  • ||

    holes of any size, for example the size of a single molecule of water

    You hear that, Tony? You'll never have to use an oversized Fleshlight again.

  • ||

    That's pretty fucking cool. I agree with Warty (*shudder*) though that the Greens would find something wrong with it.

  • Another David||

    "Don't expect miracles. There is very little the president can do by himself."

    I'm sorry, I must have confused him with somebody who's in charge of the executive branch.

  • ||

    Well you see he can order his law enforcement agencies and INS bureaucrats not to deport illegal immigrants but apparently has no power whatsoever over the DEA or Federal prosecutors.

    It's all very complicated and probably Bush's fault.

  • John||

    Beat me too it. Apparently, Justice Roberts found a little known clause in the commutation and pardons' clause that prevents the President from commuting the sentences of drug users as well.

  • Auric Demonocles||

    If only they were tax evaders instead!

  • R C Dean||

    Or creatively documented immigrants.

  • Sudden||

    It's all very complicated and probably Bush's fault.

    Why do I get the sinking feeling that this will be the DNC's party platform for the remainder of my life?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    At lunch today a coworker mentioned he's looking forward to the debates because he wants to see Romney avoid any topic. I said that I didn't see either one actually addressing any questions, and he asked what Obama has that he'd want to avoid. One of the many things I listed off was the economy. His response was first to claim that the economy is doing great, then when I shot that down and noted that unemployment is higher than the horror story where he didn't blow $800 billion of our money, he said "Yeah, but this is all Bush's fault." I'm really glad he can't vote.

  • tarran||

    I'm really glad he can't vote.

    Convicted Felon?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Not yet a U.S. citizen...

  • ||

    He could stop the WoD 'cause there are other wars for him to fight... and a cop actually gets fired.

    http://www.washingtontimes.com.....s-and-oil/

  • spayneuteryourpets||

    If Obama tells us his plans before the election, then I may vote for him. If he does not disclose, then I will vote against him. I do not trust politicians.

  • R C Dean||

    So, you don't trust politicians, but you will vote for one if he tells you what you want to hear?

  • Auric Demonocles||

    Well, Obama has such a great track record of sticking to his promises.

  • squarooticus||

    Raise your hand if you believe this.

    Bueller? Bueller?

  • circleglider||

    Marc Ambinder (like so many journalists) has a long history of weak knees in the face of Progressive politicians.

    He even let Arnold Schwarzenegger fool him.

  • AlmightyJB||

    What the hell was the point of this article?

  • R C Dean||

    Dog bites man?

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Since the United Ststes isn't about to legalize or regulate the illegal narcotics markets, the best thing a president can do may be what Obama winds up doing if he gets re-elected: using the bully pulpit to draw attention to the issue.

    Being the head of the Executive Branch he could just order the DEA to...stop?

  • ||

    "Obama will pivot to the drug war in a second term" so says Marc Ambinder and other leftist propagandists and spin docs.

    Uh huh.

  • Rod Flash||

    360 degrees

  • db||

    The President will fundamentally change Federal drug policy by implementing a tax for not engaging in antidrug activity. Everything will be different.

  • Bill Dalasio||

    In fact, I think it's more likely Ambinder got spun.


    No, Ambinder is the one doing the spinning.

  • db||

    Just a question: if Obama promised flat out to end the drug war and could be trusted to do so*, would it be worth another 4 years of all his other shit, not to mention the implicit endorsement of the past 4 years of horrendous governance entailed in his reelection?

    *And I'm a Chinese jet pilot.

  • ||

    Not a chance in Chinese hell*.

    *Not to be confused with Mongolian hell.

  • ||

    Hahaha, yeah right. Just like Bush was supposed to get all that landmark gun rights legislation he'd was storing until his safe second term out that all the Republicans tried to convince me about.

  • db||

    I think if Obama gets reelected, in his second term he will set records for unpopularity that even Bush couldn't reach.

  • db||

    And yes, I understand there's a tautology in there.

  • Mr. FIFY||

    Barry has lied about everything else... why should we believe him on this issue?

    /not racist

  • PandyGandi||

    Never fear! Obama will throw a speech at it, yahoo

    www.Global-Privacy.tk

  • teapartydoc||

    The problem with piecemeal "reform" that creates a loophole for pot smokers is that the rest of the country is not helped. We will remain in the thrall (I hope you know that this word means slavery) of big pharma and the FDA and DEA and BATF. For non-pot non-smokers this approach is a total loss and the only thing that can grow out of such an approach is an increased ability of the government to regulate the hell out of us to an even greater extent. We need real reform: the elimination of the aforementioned agencies and the elimination of all forms of government licensing.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement