Harboside, then, you're asserting was operating out of compliance with state law? If that's the case, wouldn't the issue then fall under the purview of the state of California?
It would--but not if there's a federal case and a US Attorney seeking to prosecute it.
And if that's the case, as it is with an acquaintance of mine, a hospice nurse who's being prosecuted in Tuolomne County for selling for profit, why hadn't the state taken up the cause? In fact, how is it that now the city of Oakland itself feels it has sufficient stake in this claim to go after the feds themselves?
The feds and the states don't always agree. I see this as a good thing.
From the IRS collecting taxes, which implies they accepted the fiscal basis, to the state's stance on this, the whole thing stinks and is declaration, proof positive that Obama is nothing resembling a man of his word.
What it means is they won't turn down free money. Big surprise.
I really must disagree politely with you here. I think the biggest problem here is that people haven't even listened to what the man said. Near as I can tell, he's done exactly what he said he would do--it's just that ya'll don't
like it.
Now those are two different things. If you don't like him because you don't like what he's said--that's fine, but that's very different from "he didn't do what he said he'd do".
I think the big issue here here is that no one
yet has the proof to show whether his administration has followed his words or not. We can all guess as much as we like, but until some of these cases move forward and we see the evidence--it's going to be really difficult to "call his bluff" so to speak.
I'm not defending him and saying he's done nothing wrong--I'm saying you can't prove that he has
YET. Basically I think everyone should hold their horses.
There is a difference between being an activist and a zealot, and people would do well to remember it.
In other words, I don't think I could disagree with your assessment of the situation more. The DoJ is prosecuting whom it damn well pleases, irrespective of whether or not they're following state law.
Again, respectfully, I disagree with you and ask you for proof (which is a loaded question, because I know ahead of time that you don't have any).
That doesn't make me "right". What it says is we don't know yet. There just isn't enough evidence out there. We know a good portion of whom has been arrested--but many of the whys are yet to come.
Once again, all I'm suggesting is that we should hold off on the assaults until there is some solid proof that the pres has done something incongruous with what he actually said.
I don't want to be an asshole, but here's something you probably can't do.
1. Show me a quote, taken IN CONTEXT, from the president pertaining to drug policy.
2. Find me an action by his administration that goes counter to what he said in the quote.
3. Again, CONTEXT--which means that no
qualifying statements should be left out. This SHOULD NOT be about playing semantics, but rather about addressing his ACTUAL meaning (which has been quite clear the entire time).
Because, to be honest, the skinny of it is that Obama has never said the feds were going to be lame-ducks on this. He said clearly that it's still federal law, and that he doesn't have the authority to say, "Hey everyone, don't enforce our laws--please?"
Really the best he can do is give some direction, but it should be noted that his administration DOES NOT have to listen to or follow that direction. He is not a king and they are not his court. I think this perhaps is the biggest misunderstanding in the whole thing. People attribute power to the president that he simply doesn't have.
He hasn't wavered on this guys, honest. The ENTIRE TIME he's been pointing the finger at congress and telling you that THEY need to change the law.
I'm sorry guys, but that's what the freakin' constitution says. Is it oppressive? Is it wrong? Do I hate it?
YES YES YES.
See I think that's the real issue. People aren't concerned AT ALL with what's been said, or what reality is--all they care about is the fact that people are being wronged (and I don't blame them).
Unfortunately this state/federal tug of war is murky water as it regards our law. You're seeing a manifestation of that.
Until you get some actual evidence that patients are being prosecuted, and people who operated within the confines of the law (state) are being prosecuted--there really is no opportunity to say whether Obama has gone back on his word or not, because the
CRUX of his word rests on those two things.
He said patients would not be a priority, and those following state laws wouldn't be a priority.
I get it, your friends and acquaintances and facilities are under fire--no one is denying that.
Let's see the evidence.
Where is the proof that clears all of these defendant's names?
That's the missing link here. You'd all have us just take it on confidence that they didn't break the law--I'm sorry but that's not how it works.
I won't take that on confidence, and I certainly won't--by proxy--take it on confidence that the president is a liar.
If you can prove it to me, I'll be the first one to cry foul--believe that. I don't think Obama is untouchable--I think he hasn't been touched,
yet. I'm MORE than open minded to the idea that he DID lie, it's just that you're all doing nothing but SAYING it.
Your words without proof are as good as his are to me--it's worth nothing.
My opinion on this is, effectively, in limbo--because the truth is that we just don't know yet. I'm not committing to one side or the other until the details pan out.
I DEFINITELY support the fight of all these defendants in all cases--because I think the plant should be legal and unregulated. Unfortunately, it isn't. I support them blindly--but I don't
believe them blindly.
I'll need proof they didn't break the law just the same way THEY need that proof right now to be acquitted.
I'm going to wait until the cards are on the table, in a matter of speaking. You guys here are all just calling bluffs--the truth is you don't know up from down when it comes to whether or not these guys are innocent.
