senator harry reid medical marijuana
Ending Marijuana Prohibition

D.C. Marijuana Advocates Stage Sit-In At Harry Reid’s Office

senator harry reid medical marijuanaWashington D.C. voters overwhelmingly approved marijuana legalization on Election Day 2014. However, that hasn’t stopped members of Congress from trying to block implementation of the successful initiative. The current spending bill, which hasn’t been approved yet by Congress, has language in it that could essentially nullify the will of the voters in D.C.. For obvious reasons, this is unacceptable, and has resulted in a lot of protest from the marijuana community. Yesterday Adam Eidinger and other prominent marijuana activists staged a sit-in at Harry Reid’s office, demanding that he meet with them to hear them out. Per the DCist:

Advocates for both the statehood and legal marijuana causes began a sit-in at Sen. Harry Reid’s office Wednesday afternoon to demand the outgoing Majority Leader offer an amendment to strip a Congressional spending bill of riders targeted at the District.

These riders include a provision that would apparently block D.C. from implementing a voter-approved initiative to legalize marijuana. The full extent of the rider’s effect — would it completely block legal marijuana, or just the ability to tax and regulate it? — is still being discussed by D.C. leaders. (Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton interprets the rider to prevent any future marijuana laws or regulation, but contends Initiative 71 is already an enacted law.) But any attempt by Congress to use its power over D.C. to overturn the will of local voters, the advocates say, is an unacceptable attack.

I followed this story on Twitter all day yesterday while sitting in my cubicle at work, and it sounded like at first Harry Reid’s office refused to meet with the activists, then allowed them to enter Harry Reid’s office to talk to a staff member. From what I can tell from the tweets, the staff member told the advocates that the language in the spending bill was  a ‘done deal,’ but that the entire bill was not guaranteed to pass. This has definitely been the ‘story to watch’ this week. If the bill passes as is, it will be a scary battle to see how marijuana legalization is implemented in Washington D.C., if it’s implemented at all.

  • Someguy

    Dude do you have problems with your boss if you post all the time that you are looking stuff up while at work?

    • David

      Ya never know. He might be retired watching goats from his yacht off of a beautiful Aegean island munching fresh feta cheese, Greek olives, and drinking a delicious local red, and of course, enjoying some good bud.

  • Why not protest at Andy Harris’s office? He’s the one who’s responsible for this….

    Also, the vote just squeeked by 214-212 WITH NO DEMOCRATS VOTING YES…

    http://www.vox.com/2014/12/11/7377177/cromnibus-rule-passes

    • wowFAD

      Well, for starters, it’s no longer in Andy Harris’s hands — even if he had a massive stroke of conscience, there’s nothing he can do about it, anymore. As you pointed out, it passed the House, and now it will go before the Senate. That’s why they’re going to the Senate Majority Leader’s office.

      Care to weigh in on how the Senate vote will go? Because the Senate is where we would need all Democrats voting No to make a difference. Surely Harry Reid will fight for us — he was a boxer! Because wow, did he impress when he bluffed over filibuster reform.

      Even if Reid folds like a cheap suit, surely our Democrat superhero of cannabis activism, Barrack Obama, will never sign the bill blocking DC’s initiative. Right, Scott?

      • Oh, look who’s following ME around like a mangy stray.

        For starters, this POS wouldn’t be in there if it wasn’t for Harris. It wouldn’t have passed if it wasn’t for the GOP voting for it. They got NO Democratic help in the House, so, it’s really the GOP’s baby. Protesters should protest against the people responsible for this shit.

        The Senate will pass it, of course, with some Dems voting against it, and almost ALL the Republicans voting for it. Want to bet right now that a bigger percentage of Democrats will vote against it than Republicans? The best remedy I can think of for this situation is to elect more and better Democrats. Since, you know, electing Republicans is how we got this POS to begin with.

        And, your bullshit about Obama doesn’t change the fact that he is WAY BETTER than your hero Willard “What’s Hemp” Romney would have been. In fact, I see today that the O admin has said Native Americans can grow and sell weed on reservations in states that have legalized.

        Want to tell me what Willard would have done on that? Or President McCain?

        Anyway, if you were serious about debating this, you’d admit that the way DC works is they pack this crap no one likes in must pass bills. That’s how it works. Or are you new to this shit?

        BTW, how’d that Glibertarian spoiler getting Skeletor elected work for you?

        So many subjects you just ignore…

        • wowFAD

          So you’re saying advocates should be more concerned with assigning blame than acting in a way that could have actual, real-life implications? Not a surprise — you never act in a way that will lead to actual change. After all, you spend 90% of your time coming up with excuses for all the things Democrats *can’t* do — being a Democrat apologist is a full-time job, rife with inconsistencies, huh Scott?

          Inconsistencies like this one we’re discussing: you’re saying that cannabis activists should be thankful that 100% of the Democrats in the House voted against this, but that we should just suck it up and accept the fact that Democrats in the Senate are going to vote for it and pass it.

          Reid is going to pass it. The President is going to sign it. The blocking of DC’s cannabis initiative is going to sail through both of those Democrat-controlled legislative checkpoints, but you think that FACT is worth ignoring because a Republican started it.

          Furthermore, instead of trying to justify both Reid and the President’s apathy, you’ve typically shifted the discussion in the same way you always do: “The Republican would have been worse.” Thanks for proving my point — again. And again. And again and again. As long as you keep apologizing for them, they’ll keep disappointing everyone. You, like most, did not vote for a Democrat — you voted *against* a Republican. That’s how you excuse anything and everything the Whitehouse (and Reid, incidentally) does wrong.

          What’s worse, I point this out to you at least twice a month and it still hasn’t sunk in.

          People like you always *always* make the conversation into a competition for LAST place. Democrats only have to be a little bit better than Republicans, while Republicans keep sprinting further and further to the Right. Meanwhile, your apologist compensatory strategy says that’s totally OK — and you have the audacity to call yourself a “Progressive” when your day-job is apologizing for and ignoring how the DNC’s political trajectory has been shifting gradually to the *right* for well over a decade.

          It doesn’t matter what Democrats do, or rather, what they *FAIL* to do — you’ll rush to their defense for the exact same old reason you keep using, again and again and again, to justify their losses, disappointments, and callow inaction: “The Republican would have been worse.”

          Stop being an enabler, Scott. I think you suffer from battered-Democrat syndrome. How many times do they have to knock you down before you realize they don’t actually love you back? Actually, that’s an unfair metaphor — Democrats aren’t abusive spouses, they’re the spouses who have a million excuses for disappointing the family, time and time again. And their fallback excuse is always the same: “Hey, I could be a lot worse.” That is certainly a more fitting metaphor.

          • David

            wowfad: After four/ six year’s watching these stinker’s entering Congress in January might just have you switching sides. Let’s just see how fast this new Republican congressional majority tries to wreck the national cannabis legalization movement. A clear majority of their constituent’s will support them too. They will of course, paint it as a mission to save ” all of those young minds”.

          • So when is Obama going to reschedule?

          • David

            When you stop asking about it ?

          • Did Obama SAY he was going to do that when he was running for office? Show me where he said that.

            I have said many times that he’s not that progressive on this issue. However, he is WAY more progressive than our alternatives.

            Unless you count Gary Johnson, who got what? 1% of the vote? Not really a viable alternative, HUH?

          • David

            Sometime before the end of his term would be my guess.

          • wowFAD

            David, we’ve had this discussion, before — I’m not a Republican. Remember talking to me about this, and also discussing Elmendorf, where you were born? Scott keeps trying to label me as one so he has a nice, easy strawman to argue against so he doesn’t have to admit Democrats do not walk on water.

          • “Scott keeps trying to label me as one”

            Liar. I’ve said many times that I’m pretty sure you’re a glibertarian who just likes kissing GOP ass. You know, like when you defend Jetdoc who lied about Republicans favoring legalization.

          • wowFAD

            Quote me saying “I voted for _____” or quote me coming down squarely on the side of Rightwing policy. That should keep you busy for at least an hour while I get some work done. Maybe you’ll finally realize the Republican you keep trying to argue with lives in your head and nowhere else.

          • I never said you were a Republican, Wowsie… I said you defend them. Especially the liar Jetdoc who lied about Republicans supporting legalization.

          • wowFAD

            LOL — You keep insisting there’s a glass of water in the corner of a round room, and when I tell you “No, that room is round” your rebuttal is to redefine the words “water” and “glass.”

            Failing to meet my challenge kept you busy for TWO hours. That’s something, at least. I’m just disappointed THAT reply is the weak-tea excuse you came up with to defend your presumptions…

            Ok, then. I’ll let you redefine “water” and “glass” because I already know how you’ll reply, and it’ll keep you busy at least until my workday is over. Quote me defending a Republican lawmaker on one, single issue in which I came down on his/her side.

            Back up your assertions. Quote me defending one Republican lawmaker on *any* issue. We both know you won’t (because you can’t). You’ll, once again, dodge the challenge by further specifying your terms into something vague and nonsensical until you’re confident the thread was lost down your favorite rabbit hole. Just keep moving around the goalposts, Scott — I’m sure I won’t notice.

            After you try and fail to meet this challenge, before you work yourself into a panic attack trying to cook up yet another flimsy excuse as to why you can’t back up your assertions, perhaps you should go through ALL of your comments and edit out the dozen-or-so times you have, quite specifically, called me a Republican. If you don’t, it will be extremely easy for me to prove how you’re backtracking your presumptions so fast, you’re leaving digital skid marks.

            I’m mainly disappointed I don’t have the luxury of time to really rub your nose in it, this week. Had I the time, I’d go find all of those instances before you have a chance to edit them out. Sadly, I’m just too busy, and giving you the opportunity to be intellectually dishonest might keep you busy for another two hours while I attend to more important matters.

          • Do you have some kind of problem reading? I say things, they go through the filter in your troubled mind, and come out as lies about what I said.

            So, for example…

            “Quote me defending one Republican lawmaker on *any* issue.”

            Where did I say you defended Republican lawmakers? Show me. I can show you plenty of places where I said you’ve defended Republicans–in comments on this blog–especially Jetdoc, which is how we got started again after the last time when you said you were never going to talk to me again.

            You broke that promise, just as Jetdoc did to come back with his lies about a majority of Republicans in this country supporting legalization.

            Can’t wait to see how this comes out of your shit injector.

          • wowFAD

            Hahahaha. Yep, just as predicted. If I don’t defend Republican lawmakers and I don’t defend their policies, you no longer have an, ehem, “excuse” for your behavior here, anymore — do you? It appears as though you’re just obsessed with me, personally! LOL You didn’t realize you were backing yourself into a corner, and that corner is located in my personal fan club.

            Once again, you’ve dropped all pretense of being a cannabis activist or even a liberal. Now, you’re just another sad little man trying to keep the shattered pieces of his ego together by following me around, looking for a chance to win an argument. It sure is tough being popular. LOL

            I told a colleague about the way you thought we should be happy 100% of the Democrats voted against the spending bill, but that we should ignore what’s going to happen in the Senate. The response was “he can’t be liberal, liberals are smarter than that — aren’t they?” I gotta tell you, Scott, I laughed hard for at least a minute.

            I wonder how long you spent sifting comment after comment, looking for that quotation — it’s been 24 hours, so I imagine you went through at least a hundred or so before you realized you don’t have a leg to stand on, anymore.

            While we’re on the subject of you failing to back up your assertions, by all means, quote me saying I was never going to talk to you, again. This will be the 2nd time you’ve claimed I said that, and this will be the 2nd time you fail to produce proof. That should keep you busy for another 24 hours. We both know you won’t back up that assertion, either. But I’m sure you have another passable excuse for why not. LOL In fact, I bet you do *precisely* what I say you’ll do — again!

            After all, spite is the only thing maintaining you, Scott. Just FYI, the agony of your pitiful state makes me smile.

            Poor Scott — so many dropped arguments. How many threads have you abandoned because I asked a question you couldn’t answer? LOL What makes you think this one will be any different? Just to jog your memory, why WON’T Obama/Holder reschedule cannabis?

            Just so you know, I saw you *trying* to reply. “Someone else is typing” came up, but no comment followed — ever. That must have stung, huh Scott? But fortunately, you and I still have THIS thread. Keep hope alive, Scott. Maybe I’ll slip up and you can reclaim a small bit of dignity. Maybe! LOL

            I just hope you keep this up for five more days. Then, you’ll have 100% of my personal attention, and I can decide how best to deal with you, this time. Maybe your reservoir of impotent rage will need an upgrade once I’m through with you. I mean, this will be at least the 4th time we play out this little drama. You going to vanish for two weeks after this trouncing, too? Should I just pencil you in for New Years weekend? LOL

          • David

            WOWfad I get it that you and Scott sometimes get into a heated debates. I’m cool with that. It was just saying let’s please leave race aside unless it’s being discussed as a topic.I’m in no way trying to censor speech either. However, if I say something you find highly offensive I’d want you to call me on it too. It’s just that saying all Democrats including myself would in 2014 consider the 3/5’s Amendment ok is incorrect. Thank you. I look forward to further discussions

          • “So you’re saying advocates should be more concerned with assigning blame than acting in a way that could have actual, real-life implications? ”

            The way you have to lie about what I say is quite telling, you know.

            I’m saying advocates who want to sit in an office to bring this problem to light should sit in the office of the person who created the problem. Target that person in the next election. Embarrass that person. Shame that person.

            And you said above that Harry Reid isn’t going to do anything. So…

            “After all, you spend 90% of your time coming up with excuses for all the things Democrats *can’t* do — being a Democrat apologist is a full-time job, rife with inconsistencies, huh Scott?”

            You have no idea what I spend most of my time on. It’s not this, I assure you. And my excuses as you call them are explanations of facts that you then refuse to consider while you change the subject or attack me personally. This is the very definition of bullshitter.

            “Inconsistencies like this one we’re discussing: you’re saying that cannabis activists should be thankful that 100% of the Democrats in the House voted against this, but that we should just suck it up and accept the fact that Democrats in the Senate are going to vote for it and pass it.”

            Again, when you lie about what I said, you’re creating a straw man. I don’t want you to just suck it up. I want you to help those of us trying to actually make a difference elect better Senators and Representatives. For some reason you refuse to discuss, you won’t.

            “The blocking of DC’s cannabis initiative is going to sail through both of those Democrat-controlled legislative checkpoints, but you think that FACT is worth ignoring because a Republican started it.”

            Did I say ignore it? Honestly… are you going to lie about EVERYTHING I say. I want more and better Democrats who wouldn’t have to run checkpoints because if they were in charge of the House and Senate, this piece of shit REPUBLICAN rider would have never been in the legislation in the first fucking place.

            “As long as you keep apologizing for them, they’ll keep disappointing everyone. ”

            Saying Republicans would have been, or ARE, worse isn’t apologizing for Democrats. It’s the fucking truth.

            Just like the truth you ignore: If the Democrats controlled the House, this piece of shit rider would have never been in there in the first place.

            And yet you keep apologizing for the Republicans by ignoring that basic point.

            “You, like most, did not vote for a Democrat — you voted *against* a Republican. ”

            Bullshit. I voted FOR the person who I think is MOST LIKELY to vote the way I want them to. It’s all about playing the odds.

            And I’m proud of voting for less evil. That’s why I’m really voting against the Glibertarians.

            “Democrats only have to be a little bit better than Republicans, while Republicans keep sprinting further and further to the Right.”

            It’s like while you read what I write, you make up some other person… I have said time and time again, and you refuse to acknowledge it, that there are BLUE DOG Democrats who are Republican lite, and then there are progressives. I don’t always get to vote for progressives, so I take the next best thing.

            Sure beats the hell out of voting for the people your buddy Jetdoc votes for.

            ” audacity to call yourself a “Progressive” when your day-job is apologizing for and ignoring how the DNC’s political trajectory has been shifting gradually to the *right* for well over a decade.”

            The DNC and the CPC are not the same thing. DO try to keep up.

            “It doesn’t matter what Democrats do, or rather, what they *FAIL* to do — you’ll rush to their defense ”

            Oh, it matters. That’s why I like to point out that when it comes to straight up votes on this (not riders stuck into must-pass spending bill), the Dems DO good things.

            “Stop being an enabler, Scott.”

            You don’t vote for the people most likely to do something, then you’re the enabler, whatever your name is.

          • As long as you keep apologizing for them, they’ll keep disappointing everyone.
            ^^^ this^^^

        • David

          Agreed, Willard would have tried to outlaw drinking iced tea if he thought it were possible to do so.

        • Do you have any idea when Obama is going to reschedule?

          • David

            When he’s not busy fighting to keep the federal governments lights on ?

          • So the fight to keep the lights on prevents him from signing a paper? That is one of the lamest excuses I ever heard. Hold that f***ers feet to the fire. It is the only way to get something done. Other than bribery.

      • David

        Votes aside, Washington D.C. policy is administered by the U.S. House of Representatives.

        • wowFAD

          Technically, Congress “holds the purse strings” when it comes to delving out federal funds, upon which the District is 100% reliant. The DC City Council administers the policy, but Congress pays for anything that costs money.

          • David

            wowFad. I understand, but legalization IS legalization. And whether cannabis is sold via retail stores or not as in Washington. My hope is that no one else is going to have to sit in the pokey again for using cannabis in D.C. a good thing. Yes?

          • wowFAD

            Indeed, it’s a consolation, as are the other cannabis reforms that *did* make it into the spending bill. Many of those reforms were cosponsored by people I’d rather not write nice letters to, but I have to, given what they’ve done to change things for the better. It would not be fair to only offer criticisms and ignore when someone does something right (and vice-versa).

  • wowFAD

    Sadly, Harry Reid won’t do a thing. He lost all credibility when he bluffed over reforming the filibuster. Frankly, I hope he retires before he gets the majority leadership position back in 2016. He’s been seated at the “old white guy” table far too long to be useful. He doesn’t have the chops for the current political climate and he’s certainly one of the people responsible for selling out DC’s voters as the current Senate Majority Leader.

    I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it, again — Democrats will never help us unless they have clear political capital to gain. Today’s average “Leftist” would look at the 3/5’s Compromise like a good deal, which depresses me. What’s worse, the Right knows it, which is why their social conservative agenda is never panned for the waste of time it has been.

    Nope, because Democrats are spineless cowards (and everyone knows it) Republicans run roughshod over them at every level of government. Shockingly enough, Democrats think the solution is to become *more like Republicans* — they play it safe on social issues, they pose for vanity photos with firearms, and of course, they capitulate on issues in which they have both the moral and rational high-ground. One would think it would be EASY to convince Republicans that blocking the will of DC’s voters flies in the face of their obsessive 10th Amendment worship. “Federal interference” is almost a Republican mating call. However, neither side is going to take the path of moral and intellectual consistency.

    Republicans know they won’t be held accountable for being ideological hypocrites (government small enough to fit in your bloodstream, bedroom, and birth canal, right boys?). Democrats know they’ll slide with their base as well. The Democrat apologists have already perfected their soundbite: “Do you think we were going to have a government shutdown over DC’s cannabis legalization?” And the Left will buy it, because “Republican Light” is still better than “Republican Classic” in the eyes of the DNC.

    • David

      There are some distinct advantages in being a Congressional minority party. The Republicans now own it. They can no longer blame Democrat’s for their failure to govern as they drive the American economy back into the ditch. PS how could Sen. Reid have possibly reconciled the D.C. cannabis vote with the Tea-baggers currently running the House, when the House controls D.C. policies ?

      • Well some of those Teabaggers are anti-Prohibition.

        http://www.theweedblog.com/republicans-against-marijuana-prohibition/

        ============

        So when is Obama going to reschedule?

      • Rhaman

        Why not, the Democrats are still blaming Bush for everything they screw up, and that’s just about everything.

        As usual, making excuses for pathetic politicians has become the norm using the mantra my rep. isn’t the problem, it’s yours.

        The Dems and “O” had total control of DC for the first two years after he was elected and squandered that opportunity by continuing to blame Bush rather than focusing on developing and implementing any meaningful legislation.

        • David

          The Democrat’s agreed to abide by a 60 vote majority threshold to pass a bill while they were the majority party. Now, the new Republican majority has already stated that they intend to scrape the 60 vote rule as soon as they assume power in January. They have no integrity

          • Politicians have no integrity

            FIFY

        • David

          How can I not blame a President that lead us into what will one day be a World War, based upon a lie. Drove the economy not just into a ditch but off of Pikes Peak. Condoned the use of prisoner torture (according to his Veep). No. He owns it. Defend it.

      • wowFAD

        I already answered that question: Republicans are obsessed with the 10th Amendment, and overriding the right of voters to govern themselves in this way is the very definition of federal interference.

        Were I one of the DNC leadership who negotiated what was included and what was excluded from this bill (and sadly, since the bill was introduced, debated, and passed on the floor in less than an hour, we don’t know who got what for selling out DC’s voters to Andy Harris), it would have been a simple matter to show them how this action on this issue will hurt the GOP, nationally, especially when Paul Broun (a popular Tea Bagger) cosponsored many of the cannabis reform measures that made it into the spending bill to the resounding applause of his constituency.

        Democrats should have made Republicans realize letting DC impelement their initiative was in their best interests as a party. Clearly, that did not happen.

    • David

      Although I disagree with you politically about 99% of the time , I try to do so with respect. However, I find your remark stating that “Democrats would have voted for the 3/5’s Amendment” highly offense and I think you owe every Democrat on this blog an apology for including it in your post. Racial slur’s and connotations have no place unless you really want to go down that rabbit hole. Perhaps you don’t think people know history but that would be an incorrect assumption on your part. Let’s just move on and leave race historical or otherwise outside the box, ok ? Thank. You.

      • wowFAD

        David, again, you and I do not disagree politically. We’ve also had THAT discussion, as well. We do disagree if you believe Democrats (the ones in office) are doing everything they can to end the drug war. Scott calls me a Republican because I refuse to give the DNC a shoulder rub for just being *slightly* better than Republicans. Since Democrats know all they have to do to get into office is not be Republican, nobody holds their feet to the fire, ever. And the reason is the same reason Scott keeps giving, over and over: “The Republican would be worse.” The difference is that I don’t accept that particular platitude, anymore, so I don’t scamper around apologizing for Democrats NOT doing the right thing, either.

        • David

          wowFad I just don’t want to believe you actually believe that I would agree with the 3/5 Amendment. That’s like calling me and every other Democrat on this blog a racist to our face’s. as I am indeed a Democrat. I don’t believe anyone or any political party is blameless, they’re all culpable to some degree. It’s where we do agree that I seek common ground. Ok? Let’s move on and have a civil discussion and a nice weekend. Thank you.

          • wowFAD

            David, you’re under the impression I was talking about Democrat voters. I was talking about the ones in office who refuse to fight for anything unless it’s an easy victory or completely without risk.

            I make a distinction between the people who do the voting and the people who manipulate the voters. That’s why the subject of my comment could be referred to by the words “Democrats” and “DNC” used interchangeably.

          • David

            I understand it was only the 3/5’s Amendment part I took umbrage with. It’s cool. Let’s move on. Peace.

          • wowFAD

            Believe me, it angers me as well. Democrats (the ones in office, again) keep bending and capitulating on issues that *really* matter, despite having the upper hand in the argument. That angers me.

          • You think the elected black Democrats would vote for the 3/5ths thing? Or is lying just what you do?

          • wowFAD

            Yes. I think even John Lewis is a pale shadow of the Civil Rights movement. If he wanted more African Americans to vote, he’d pressure the first black President and the first black Attorney General to reschedule cannabis, thus ending the single most prevalent method of disenfranchising young black voters before they ever get to see a ballot: possession convictions. So here’s another hoop for you to jump through — why won’t the first black President and the first black Attorney General do the right thing and reschedule, given that section 811 of the Controlled Substances Act specifically grants the executive power to do so? Have fun coming up with more reasons you DON’T have to answer that question.

        • “Scott calls me a Republican”

          Liar. You glibertarian.

          • Milton Friedman estimated that if the Federal Government was limited to its actual constitutional power the economy would be growing at 10% a year. Do you remember the minimum wage rising without passing a law when the growth rate was only 8% a year?

    • psi2u2

      I think pushback is coming.

  • PeaceOnEarth

    Just vote Libertarian or for the greens in 2016. Until the republicans or democrats feel like they can loose elections on this issue, they probably won’t take the will of the voters seriously.

    • David

      Libertarians ARE Republicans. A much more extremist anti-government version thereof , but Republicans nonetheless.

      • Well the WOD IS Government. Had enough yet?

        • I’ve had enough of you… but I’ll keep playing.

          Libertarians are not Republicans. I know plenty of left-leaning Libertarians. They tend to vote more for Democrats because the issues they think are most important, like ending the drug war, are better addressed by leftists than righties.

          I might not be able to get them to vote for the people who would actually end this madness, but at least the don’t (or they claim they don’t) actually vote for Republicans.

          • Left libertarians? Libertarians who want more government? That is a contradiction in terms. Libertarians who want the government doing their thieving for them, instead of being honest crooks and doing their own thieving? And don’t even get me started on thieving Republicans.

            BTW the evidence shows you can’t get enough of me.

        • David

          What is WOD ?

    • David

      The “will of the people” being the one third of Americans who bothered to enter a voting booth or simply lick a stamp. PS: Libertarians ARE Republicans. They simply wear different clown suits.

  • rgreene

    congress could be the second largest waste of money ever. after the war on drugs of course. the people have spoken. what don’t you understand?

    • David

      You refer to the November election in which barely 1/3 of Americans voted ? If so they spoke with a whisper no one will pay any attention to thm except perhaps Fox News hounds.

      • Denny

        The non-voting folks sent a message to their “former” representatives–you’re history.
        Relying strictly on the lamestream media for all of your news reporting is comparable to sticking your head in the sand.
        Diversity of input and weighing the validity of their news sources offers a potentially clearer view of things.

  • What Would Mitt Do?

    > Riffle said the Department of Justice would have the legal standing to sue. But the Obama administration, which publicly opposes congressional attempts to block legalization in DC and asked federal prosecutors to let states experiment with legalization, might not be willing to do so. The Justice Department could also accept the argument that legalization was enacted in November.

    http://www.vox.com/2014/12/12/7382977/cannabis-legalization-dc-council

    But slow progress isn’t good enough for wowFAD, who’s BUTT HURT (to use one of his favorite phrases) over the lack of people voting Glibertarian has turned him into a GOP ass kissing troll.

  • Uncle Arthur

    There’s been a lot of back and forth about Democrats and Republicans on this thread as well as others. So, I got a question for Democrats and Republicans:
    Exactly where do I fit in your binary system? Let’s see now, I support closing all the military bases overseas and using the proceeds to use for things here at home to benefit US citizens. I oppose any intervention in the Middle East despite how many times the US media trots the ISIS boogeyman (Don’t get me wrong, ISIS is a bad organization but not an imminent threat to the US.) I oppose the US/NATO hostility towards Russia. I don’t believe that aiding neo-Nazis and oligarchs in Ukraine to overthrow an elected government (however flawed) and calling it “democracy” is a constructive use of US policy. Take that, John McCain! I want a monetary system based on something tangible and not fiat paper. I have no hate for Israel, but why should the US taxpayer be on the hook for billions of dollars in aid to that country as well as others? I want to end the drug war that’s been going on since 1914 and have cannabis completely descheduled and regulated like rosemary and thyme. I want Guantanamo closed and the Patriot Act repealed. I want Edward Snowden to come home and be given amnesty and Chelsea (fka Bradley) Manning freed. I want all people convicted of all non violent drug offenses to be made whole and given their lives back.
    Both parties love badgering sovereign countries like Venezuela, Ecuador, Bolivia, Cuba and others on how to run their business, and go as far as to use US taxpayer money (like Nat’l Endowment for Democracy funds) to undermine their governments in the name of “democracy”. That doesn’t represent me. Just recently, the house just passed a despicable warmongering resolution against Russia (only ten Congress people opposed!) accusing Russia of all kind of silly things which are not even remotely true. Republicans and Democrats don’t speak for me on Russian policy or almost anything else. I’m not asking for pie in the sky. So where exactly do I fit in Republicans and Democrats? Your binary system doesn’t welcome me.

    • ganjalove

      ^what he said.

    • ganjalove

      however, I would like a pie in the sky, similar to the “It’s cloudy with a chance of Meatballs” animation, before they become giant sized.