Current Events, Legal, Politics

The Response Obama Wouldn’t Give: Medical Marijuana Question in Minnesota Monday

Obama seemed unable to fully answer a constituents question yesterday. As a patriotic American, I want to offer our fumbling President a helping hand, so as to prevent any future embarrassment on his part.

Yesterday in Minnesota, President Obama was asked “If you can’t legalize marijuana, why can’t you just legalize medical marijuana?” Here’s his response at the local townhall, courtesy of

Click here to watch Obama's fumbling response on Rawstory!

“A lot of states are making decisions about medical marijuana,” Obama explained. “As a controlled substance, the issue is then that is it being prescribed by a doctor as opposed to… you know, well, I’ll leave it at that.”

Good job, President Obama. Marijuana is currently a “controlled substance”, as it has been since 1970…which means the answer to the question, “Why can’t you just legalize medical marijuana?” starts here: Gonzales v. Oregon, 546 U.S. 243 (2006).

Gonzales v. Oregon is the case that the pending lawsuit against the state of Iowa is based on. President Obama, if you haven’t heard of this case, and how it relates to medical marijuana…well, you soon will.

From Gonzalez v Oregon:

In 2001, the Attorney General issued an Interpretive Rule to address the implementation and enforcement of the CSA with respect to ODWDA [Oregon Death With Dignity Act], declaring that using controlled substances to assist suicide is not a legitimate medical practice and that dispensing or prescribing them for this purpose is unlawful under the CSA.

The United States Supreme Court ruled on behalf of the state of Oregon and upheld Oregon’s statute allowing physician-assisted suicide:

(d) The Attorney General’s opinion is unpersuasive under Skidmore. The CSA and this Court’s case law amply support the conclusion that Congress regulates medical practice insofar as it bars doctors from using their prescription-writing powers as a means to engage in illicit drug dealing and trafficking as conventionally understood. Beyond this, the Act manifests no intent to regulate the practice of medicine generally, which is understandable given federalism’s structure and limitations. The CSA’s structure and operation presume and rely upon a functioning medical profession regulated under the States’ police powers.

In other words, the States get to decide what is and isn’t medicine, Mr. Obama. Marijuana is already medicine legally in 16 states (plus D.C.). You can dodge questions all you want, but legally, the federal government cannot determine whether or not state medical laws are legitimate or not. Surely you know this. After all, the state of Arizona has just cited Gonzalez v. Oregon in Arizona’s medical marijuana lawsuit against the federal government:

Arizona has cited Gonzalez v Oregon! Maybe Obama's heard of it...

The court concluded that Oregon met the constitutional requirements for standing by showing a sufficient injury to its sovereign and legitimate interest in the continued enforceability of its own statutes. Id. at 1087. In reaching this conclusion, the court did not require evidence or allegations of the federal government actually attempting to enforce its laws against the state. The mere conflict between state and federal law, and thus, the state’s consequent inability to enforce its own laws, was sufficient to demonstrate an injury for standing purposes.

If Arizona can figure it out, Obama, then you should be able to as well. Next time you’re faced with this question by a constituent, kindly refer them to Gonzalez v Oregon. After all, you were a constitutional “professor” at the University of Chicago Law School…right?



One thought on “The Response Obama Wouldn’t Give: Medical Marijuana Question in Minnesota Monday

  1. Constitutional lawyer? He has been absorbed by the Borg. He is owned. This is an implication that there is an entity of ownership. And, I believe there is, indeed, such an entity.

    The problem for us in the citizenry is that this now becomes as if we are trying to find the name of the wind. We name the wind by the direction it is blowing from and that’s all we get.

    So? What direction is this wind that impels our grand legal intention? Perhaps some other descriptions of the direction the wind is blowing from would help.

    When the control room to the nuclear power plant two hours or so upwind, straight west, of Des Moines, Iowa, exploded violently from massive power drain as this crippled nuclear power generator plant was swamped with flood water that plant lost all ability to continue to pump coolant through the spent fuel rod storage tank on top of the nuclear reactor.

    Sound familiar?? It is or you have been under a tub for the last few months of Fukushema Dieche because that is what happened to them when they had not one, but four reactors simultaneously meltdown into a radioactive nightmare to the whole world.

    It’s why I don’t go out into the rain this year. It’s why I don’t want to smoke Mexican pot because it is loaded with particles from those burning piles of atomically active filth you Still don’t know about that is going on even Yet.

    We came within a hair’s breadth of irradiating the Missouri River and then entire Gulf of Mexico!

    Let me say it again, “We had a catastrophic failure of a spent fuel rod cooling tank right here in the mid west of these United States and it was carefully managed into insignificance by the media.”

    Now, that is one damned powerful wind, my friends.

    Care to tell me which direction it is blowing from?

    Let me put this to you: could it be blowing from the direction of: marijuana has been a source of hidden tax money from the people who love it to all these warriors who are going to lands far off and killing people? That sucks up lots of money. Mercenaries are Expensive!

    Oh, sure, reefer madness may very well have been have been started by corporate saviors at Du Pont and R Hurst as they screwed us like grapes in a press for their wine in the bank. But, that is small money compared to attaching a hidden tax scam of illegality on pot to continually skim the profit off the most powerful vegitable in the world being sold at the highest prices in the world… to you.

    So, if you think reefer madness is about money, I sure agree with you.

    If you think it has clues to what and who are continuing this filth of child stealing and jailing for a completely safe, beneficial plant… maybe we agree some more.

    And, if you think about it that way, maybe we could conclude that when this is explained to a constitutional professor that we are in an agitated state of pre world war three and gathering money and power to kill a hell of a lot of people with it… that he would be persuaded to shut his mouth and stop trying to even look like he is trying to protect us.

    He would become part of that wind.

    I am your humble narrator


    Posted by suckmebush | August 17, 2011, 7:41 am

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Subscribe to posts by email!

Join 100 other followers

%d bloggers like this: