Showing posts with label barack obama. Show all posts
Showing posts with label barack obama. Show all posts

Monday, October 19, 2009

Feds Lighten Up On Medical Marijuana Just As L.A. Tightens The Screws

Let my people grow.


By Steve Elliott in Chronic City


​In a stunning bit of role reversal, law enforcement officials in dispensary-heavy Los Angeles County are gearing up for a massive mobilization against hundreds of pot shops even while the Obama administration backs away from the federal government's traditional role as marijuana enforcer in the states where medical pot is legal.

Today, the administration sent new, more relaxed medical marijuana guidelines to federal prosecutors in the 14 states which have legalized weed for patients. Under the new policy, the federal government will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they conform to state laws.

While keeping a promise President Barack Obama made on the campaign trail in 2008 and since affirmed by Attorney General Eric Holder, the new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration line, which continued to enforce harsh, Nixon-era federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.

Read the rest at Chronic City in the SF Weekly blog, "The Snitch": Chronic City: Feds Lighten Up On Medical Marijuana Just As L.A. Tightens Screws | Digg story

Sunday, October 18, 2009

It's In Writing: Obama Administration Won't Try To Arrest Medical Marijuana Users And Suppliers



By DEVLIN BARRETT
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) - The Obama administration will not seek to arrest medical marijuana users and suppliers as long as they conform to state laws, under new policy guidelines to be sent to federal prosecutors Monday.

Two Justice Department officials described the new policy to The Associated Press, saying prosecutors will be told it is not a good use of their time to arrest people who use or provide medical marijuana in strict compliance with state laws.

The new policy is a significant departure from the Bush administration, which insisted it would continue to enforce federal anti-pot laws regardless of state codes.

Fourteen states allow some use of marijuana for medical purposes: Alaska, California, Colorado, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont and Washington.

California is unique among those for the widespread presence of dispensaries - businesses that sell marijuana and even advertise their services. Colorado also has several dispensaries, and Rhode Island and New Mexico are in the process of licensing providers, according to the Marijuana Policy Project, a group that promotes the decriminalization of marijuana use.

Attorney General Eric Holder said in March that he wanted federal law enforcement officials to pursue those who violate both federal and state law, but it has not been clear how that goal would be put into practice.

A three-page memo spelling out the policy is expected to be sent Monday to federal prosecutors in the 14 states, and also to top officials at the FBI and the Drug Enforcement Administration.

The memo, the officials said, emphasizes that prosecutors have wide discretion in choosing which cases to pursue, and says it is not a good use of federal manpower to prosecute those who are without a doubt in compliance with state law.

The officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to discuss the legal guidance before it is issued.

"Major Step Forward"

"This is a major step forward," said Bruce Mirken, communications director for the Marijuana Policy Project. "This change in policy moves the federal government dramatically toward respecting scientific and practical reality."

At the same time, the officials said, the government will still prosecute those who use medical marijuana as a cover for other illegal activity. The memo particularly warns that some suspects may hide old-fashioned drug dealing or other crimes behind a medical marijuana business.

In particular, the memo urges prosecutors to pursue marijuana cases which involve violence, the illegal use of firearms, selling pot to minors, money laundering or other crimes.

And while the policy memo describes a change in priorities away from prosecuting medical marijuana cases, it does not rule out the possibility that the federal government could still prosecute someone whose activities are allowed under state law.

The memo, officials said, is designed to give a sense of prosecutorial priorities to U.S. Attorneys in the states that allow medical marijuana. It notes that pot sales in the United States are the largest source of money for violent Mexican drug cartels, but adds that federal law enforcement agencies have limited resources.

Medical marijuana advocates have been anxious to see exactly how the administration would implement candidate Barack Obama's repeated promises to change the policy in situations in which state laws allow the use of medical marijuana.

Shortly after Obama took office, DEA agents raided four dispensaries in Los Angeles, prompting confusion about the government's plans.

---
On the Net:
Drug Enforcement Administration

Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Aptly Named 'Joint Resolution' Succeeds; California Senate Urges Change in Federal Medical Marijuana Rules


By Steve Elliott in Chronic City

​By a 23-15 vote, the California State Senate on Monday approved a "joint resolution" urging the federal government to stop Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) raids on medical marijuana patients and providers. The Sen. Mark Leno-authored resolution additionally calls for the nation to "create a comprehensive federal medical marijuana policy that ensures safe and legal access to any patient that would benefit from it."

Marijuana advocates say recent enforcement activity, including DEA arrests following a raid in Upper Lake, Calif. last week, underscore the need for Senate Joint Resolution (SJR) 14, introduced by Leno in June. Although both President Barack Obama and Attorney General Eric Holder have signaled willingness to change federal policy on medical marijuana, the Administration hasn't come forward with an actual implementation plan.

"Patients and providers in California remain at risk of arrest and prosecution by federal law enforcement and legally established medical marijuana cooperatives continue to be the subject of federal raids," Leno said.

Read the rest at Chronic City in the S.F. Weekly blog, "The Snitch":

Chronic City: Aptly Named 'Joint Resolution' Succeeds; California Senate Urges Change in Federal Medical Marijuana Rules

Friday, April 10, 2009

Mr. President, It's Time To Talk About Marijuana

In a recent town hall meeting, President Obama, when asked about the legalization of marijuana, nervously laughed and briefly dismissed the idea, which had been advanced as a way to help pull out of our current economic doldrums. In doing so, the President was following conventional wisdom when it comes to marijuana -- that to openly support reform or repeal of harsh anti-pot laws is tantamount to political suicide.

The President's nervousness around this touchy issue -- particularly in view of his admitted youthful marijuana use -- is completely understandable. But I don't think it's news to anyone that the political landscape is changing, and changing rapidly. Especially when it comes to marijuana, there is a huge shift underway in public perception of the herb -- one that will eventually and inevitably result in legalization. We are nearing that tipping point.

Olympic swimming star Michael Phelps' recent indiscretion is one of the catalysts that propelled marijuana to the front burner. (In case you've been under a rock, Phelps was photographed hitting a marijuana bong at a party.)

The marijuana community united in support of Phelps when he was unceremoniously dumped by corporate sponsor Kellogg's, and beyond that, a lot of people who hadn't given much thought to marijuana suddenly were wondering, "Hmm... If pot is really so bad, then how did Michael Phelps win all those gold medals?"

But there's a lot more to the story than that. The issue of marijuana law reform deserves serious consideration, because it has a big impact on both individual lives and families, and on law enforcement priorities and budgets, along with overcrowded jails and prisons.

No Time To Wait

I've seen the idea batted around that perhaps the President is biding his time. According to this line of thought, "controversial" things like marijuana reform will have to wait until Obama's presumed second term, when American presidents have traditionally dealt with issues that otherwise might have come back to haunt them when they ran for re-election.

I think of myself as a patient man, but there's more to this scenario than patiently waiting for politicians to lead. Most important is the fact that, contrary to what many believe, lots of people are still being busted for pot. In 2007, more than 872,000(!) people were arrested for marijuana -- an all-time high. The vast majority of those cases -- 775,000 -- were for simple possession.

If we're supposed to wait four more years for marijuana law reform, that means, at current rates, almost 3.5 million more Americans will have been arrested for marijuana before anything changes. More than 3 million of those arrests will have been for possession alone. That's just unacceptable.

Opponents of the war on marijuana -- or the "marijuana vote," if you will -- voted overwhelmingly for Obama in last November's election. While most of us are under no illusion that we'll receive any special treatment, what we do ask is to at least be taken seriously.

We believe that the issues of privacy, the erosion of civil liberties, jail and prison overcrowding, and civil forfeiture are crucially serious -- and the war on marijuana and its users directly and hugely impacts all of these concerns.

But while all of these issues are serious to any caring, informed citizen, none of them has the immediate and visceral impact of the most important issue of all: We believe it is wrong to jail people for using marijuana. Period. The punishment just doesn't fit the supposed "crime."

The United States already has a higher proportion of its population behind bars than any nation on Earth. Forget Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran; we've got them all beat, when it comes to keeping people in cages. Do we really need to exacerbate this problem by locking up people for pot?

Let's leave aside for a moment the genuine and valid questions many of us have about the Constitutionality of a law which outlaws a green plant and monopolizes that natural resource (cannabis) for the federal government's production -- which the current law assuredly does.

And to find our way to a productive discussion, we'll leave behind the extreme frustration many of us feel that the important issue of marijuana law seemingly ranks in priority somewhere below, say, a photo-op with Queen Elizabeth.

Let's cut to the chase: the financial aspect of prohibition vs. regulation. Legalization, regulation and taxation of the cannabis industry would result in a huge new source of revenue for federal, state and local governments. A substantial new revenue stream for government can only assist as we find ways to address the financial crisis which faces our nation.

This revenue stream could be established without substantially increasing the rate of marijuana use in the United States. In fact, if we look at the data from the Netherlands, there is reason to believe that legalization would result in reduced marijuana use, especially among young people.

Marijuana prohibition currently costs American taxpayers almost $42 billion a year. Compare this negative cash flow to the projected tax benefits of legalization -- between $2.4 and $6.2 billion annually -- and it becomes obvious why Milton Friedman and more than 500 other respected economists publicly support the legalization of marijuana.

In discussing government marijuana policy with fellow activists, we've wondered if the federal government can supply even one credible argument against legalization and regulation. And we've been unanimous in agreeing that we haven't seen one yet. What, exactly, are the benefits of marijuana remaining illegal? We'd really like to know.

The Question of Rescheduling

An excellent first step towards ameliorating the disaster that is federal marijuana policy (and has been for decades) would be to reschedule pot. Marijuana's current DEA classification as a "Schedule I" drug (right up there with heroin and PCP) means that, according to the federal government, pot has "a high potential for abuse and no accepted medical use." Almost unbelievably, even cocaine is deemed less dangerous than marijuana, receiving a Schedule II ranking.

That pot has no medical value would certainly come as news to the thousands of doctors and scientists who've shown marijuana to be an effective medicine for many conditions, and to the hundreds of thousands of medical marijuana patients. Which is to say, marijuana is scheduled incorrectly to such an extent that it would be comical if the real-world effects weren't so tragic.

It's important not to lose sight of the fact that ill people are needlessly suffering because of federal marijuana policies. Policies like these are impossible to rationalize or justify.

Marijuana's unjustifiable Schedule I status has resulted in years of the DEA's misguided policy of raiding medical marijuana patients and providers, even in states that have legalized pot's medical use -- because the federal government officially doesn't recognize any legitimate uses.

That's rather schizophrenic, since the federal government has itself for 30 years been supplying a handful of patients with government-produced medical marijuana. Hypocrisy much?

The Tide Is Turning

We applaud the positive moves the Obama administration has already made in regard to drug policy. We are encouraged that Mr. Obama supported pot decriminalization during his 2004 Senate campaign. Especially laudable is the stated new policy of the DEA, as confirmed by Atty. Gen. Holder, that federal resources won't be used to raid medical marijuana patients and providers in states where medical pot is legal.

But while that's a big step in the right direction, it ultimately won't be enough, as it doesn't address the issue of recreational use. More than 20 million Americans use marijuana regularly, and, according to Time magazine, 42 percent of the population has tried it at least once.

According to recent polls, marijuana legalization now enjoys majority support on the West Coast. Nationwide, the number is greater than 40 percent in three independent polls, and steadily creeping upward.

With a national majority soon to favor legalization -- sometime within the next 10-12 years, according to experts -- there is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to lead on this issue. We believe it deserves a thoughtful response.

Mr. President, it's time to talk about marijuana.

Monday, January 26, 2009

Stop The Medical Marijuana Raids

Lest anyone forget their undying hatred of and scorn for medical marijuana patients, the federal Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA), currently still staffed by officials from the Bush Administration, has acted quickly and cynically to undermine and disregard statements made by President Barack Obama.

On January 22, the DEA raided a medical marijuana dispensary in California for the first time since President Obama took office. During Obama's campaign, he pledged to put an end to this cruel and capricious practice, saying, "I would not have the Justice Department prosecuting and raiding medical marijuana users. It's not a good use of our resources." Medical marijuana has been legal in California since 1996. Since then, a dozen other states have passed similar laws.

"We are hopeful that these are the last remnants of the Bush regime, and that President Obama will quickly develop a more compassionate policy toward our most vulnerable citizens," said Caren Woodson of Americans for Safe Access (ASA), a medical marijuana advocacy group.

National media outlets including the San Francisco Examiner have called on the President to end the raids. "Admittedly, he's been on the job just a few days, but now-President Obama's administration has just overseen its first medical marijuana raid. It's time for him to live up to his promise and call off the dogs," wrote J.D. Tuccille of the Examiner.

The DEA conducted this raid knowing full well that President Obama has repeatedly pledged to end federal threats, arrests, and prosecutions of patients and their providers in medical cannabis states. "For DEA to act with such brazen arrogance and in direct conflict with the new President’s pledge to end federal raids is deeply concerning," ASA said in a statement. "With only weeks left in office, it is clear that top DEA officials are using this transitional period to exploit the differences in policy between the old and new administration."

To their eternal shame, state and local cops, in direct contravention of California law, aided federal agents in the raid. How must Californians feel about voting to allow sick people to use marijuana free from police harassment, only to have their state, county, and city law enforcement helping to serve a federal warrant? Don’t you just love the idea that your California tax dollars paid for this raid?

This shameful raid is only the most recent in a string of nearly 100 raids on medical marijuana dispensaries operating legally under California state law. The medical marijuana community and others must move swiftly to bring an end to these senseless, harmful and outdated medical marijuana raids, as Obama vowed in the campaign.

Obama could get off to an excellent start by appointing new leadership in the DEA and making it unmistakably clear to the Department of Justice that under the Obama administration, this practice is no longer acceptable.

Last year, the American College of Physicians endorsed the use of medical marijuana, which, along with pointing out strong scientific support for marijuana's medical efficacy, noted that "a clear discord exists between the scientific community and federal legal and regulatory agencies over the medicinal value of marijuana."

It is time to bring our government back in line with the scientific community by ending these medical marijuana raids. No one should suffer criminal penalties simply for using the medicine that works best for them. The harmful and outdated policy of pursuing, persecuting and prosecuting medical marijuana patients must end.

The sick and dying have enough to worry about with their medical issues, without having the additional worry of gung-ho federal agents kicking in their doors, stealing their medicine, and seizing their homes, children, and bank accounts.

What You Can Do

• Marijuana Policy Project (MPP) has an online action form to contact President Obama and ask him to quickly appoint new leadership to the DEA, so they get the message loud and clear.

• The National Organization for the Reform of Marijuana Laws (NORML) has published suggested verbiage online for a call to the White House at (202) 456-1111. http://stash.norml.org/president-obama-stop-funding-dea-raids-on-medical-marijuana/

• Students for Sensible Drug Policy (SSDP) also has an excellent online form through which you can send a message to the President: http://www.ssdp.org/stoptheraids

• Americans for Safe Access is asking everyone to call President Obama and urge that he issue an immediate suspension to all federal funds used to investigate, intimidate, arrest, and prosecute individuals who use or provide medical cannabis in accordance with their state laws.

Call the White House at (202) 456-1111 and say:

"Hi, my name is _____________. On Jan. 22, the Drug Enforcement Agency has raided a medical cannabis dispensary in Tahoe, California. The dispensary was raided by DEA despite numerous statements by President Obama saying he would end federal interference with state medical cannabis laws. I'm very concerned about outgoing DEA officials undermining these state laws and aggressively threatening innocent Americans. I'm also concerned about DEA taking action that is an affront to President Obama's position. I am pleading with President Obama to issue an immediate suspension of all federal efforts to investigate, intimidate, arrest, or prosecute individuals who use or provide medical cannabis in accordance with their state laws. Medical marijuana patients are ready for change, too! Please help us."

"This is the single most important action you have been asked to take this year," ASA says on its site. "We need President Obama's support. Once you’ve made this phone call, please forward this message to friends and family. Then visit WhiteHouse.gov to copy and paste the above message."

Monday, January 12, 2009

This May Be Your Last Chance To Speak Out Against Domestic Surveillance - Get FISA Right!


American society is at one of those defining moments, one of those once-in-a-generation turning points which will help to show who we are as a people and as a nation.

Are we going to be a total surveillance society? Do we let ourselves be taken into an age of fear, mistrust, and paranoia, forever feeling that we are being watched and that everyone is a spy?

Or do we hold our heads up, unafraid, and as Americans declare that enough is enough?

Don't miss your chance to speak out against domestic surveillance and the FISA and PATRIOT Acts. Voting at the Change.org site ends at 2 p.m. Pacific time on Thursday, Jan. 15.

Jon Pincus' idea, "Get FISA Right, repeal the PATRIOT Act, and restore our civil liberties" is currently at number 8 in Change.org's Ideas for Change competition with more than 7100 votes. The Top 10 ideas will be presented to the Obama Administration on Inauguration Day and will be supported by a national lobbying campaign run by Change.org, MySpace, and some non-profit partners as well — clearly, it could be a big deal.

"FISA and the PATRIOT Act strike at the core of our Fourth and First Amendment Rights and institutionalize a surveillance society -- and FISA's telecom immunity clause mocks the rule of law by not holding telecom companies accountable for any illegal actions," says strategist/activist/writer Jon Pincus. "Beginning the new Administration and Congress by focusing on these issues sends one of the clearest signals possible that that the new government is committed to ending the abuses of the last eight years and restoring our civil liberties."

Pincus and his group, Get FISA Right, are asking that President Obama, In the first 100 days of his Administration:

• Stay immunity lawsuits until after the Inspectors' General report in July (Electronic Frontier Foundation's What Obama Can and Should Do To Stop Telecom Immunity discusses this)

• Comply with FISA and other legislation (including the warrant requirements) and clarify that he will not assert "Article II" power

• Defer bulk surveillance of Americans, even though it has been authorized by the FISA Amendment Act.

Back on June 29 of last year, Reality Catcher called on then-Senator Obama to stand against telecom immunity and to Get FISA Right. Now the President-Elect has one of those rare second chances in American politics -- the chance to truly get it right this time, and to show that he cares about the civil liberties enshrined in our great Constitution.

Many of Obama's supporters, myself included, were quite disappointed when he failed to uphold his promise to filibuster any bill that contained telecom immunity, and instead reversed course and ultimately voted for passage of the FISA Amendments Act (FAA). But, as Obama himself said when defending his support for the FAA:

"This was not an easy call for me. I know that the FISA bill that passed the House is far from perfect. I wouldn't have drafted the legislation like this, and it does not resolve all of the concerns that we have about President Bush's abuse of executive power. It grants retroactive immunity to telecommunications companies that may have violated the law by cooperating with the Bush Administration's program of warrantless wiretapping. This potentially weakens the deterrent effect of the law and removes an important tool for the American people to demand accountability for past abuses. That's why I support striking Title II from the bill, and will work with Chris Dodd, Jeff Bingaman and others in an effort to remove this provision in the Senate."

Unfortunately, those efforts to amend the FAA by stripping immunity out of the bill or delaying its implementation failed, despite Obama's support. But now, as President, Obama will have the power to make things right. Now he can prove that he meant what he said when he opposed telecom immunity, that he stands behind the votes he made against immunity, and that his claims of a "change" when it comes to reversing the Bush Administration's authoritarian excesses are more than empty rhetoric.

"That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens... That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary. This Administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not. There are no short-cuts to protecting America..."

~ Senator Barack Obama, August 1, 2007

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/remarks_of_senator_obama_the_w_1.php


Monday, January 5, 2009

Radical Obama Acting Like He Won The Election


The GOP's formidable strategy for how to oppose Barack Obama

According to the Washington Post, right-wingers are angry with Obama for...not being right-wing. It seems they're upset that Obama isn't appointing the same people John McCain would have appointed if he had won. As the Post put it, "conservatives fear that some of these Obama transition advisers are too far left on the political spectrum and are a sign of radical policies to come."

What are the signs of "radicalism" that Obama is showing? He's filling regulatory positions with people who want regulate industry -- instead of the industry-stooge-hack-lobbyists who have filled the positions during the Bush years.

And in the area of civil rights, it's even worse -- Obama has people on his transition advisory team who are, get this, gay and, gulp, non-white.

To conservative tool Roger Clegg, this is "disturbing." Roger is also "has some fears about a return to racial quotas." Why? Because Obama had the radical gall to put the president of the NAACP on his civil rights advisory team.

So all those emails from our grandparents were right -- Obama really is a radical hellbent on destroy America with gays, blacks, and extremists who believe corporations should follow some rules.

But back to the matter at hand--conservatives who are in stunned disbelief that Obama isn't following the usual rules of an election whereby right-wing hacks get to have all the administration jobs even if they don't win the election. How are they to deal with Obama's brazen and outrageous decision to implement the policies the public voted for?

Here's our suggestion for how right-wingers can cope with the unfairness of Obama's appointments...



http://www.236.com/news/2009/01/02/conservative_complains_that_ob_10947.php

Sunday, June 29, 2008

An Open Letter To Senator Obama: Please Vote NO On Telecom Immunity - Get FISA Right

Senator Obama, you've asked of your supporters to believe not just in your ability to bring about change in Washington, but to believe in our ability to do the same, as concerned and caring American citizens who love our country.

I hear your clarion call. And I believe that the American people, in this crucial time for the future of our country, are coming together to change its direction and to stand up for our freedoms.

The people who support you and who believe in you are speaking loudly and clearly. I believe you will hear them and will uphold your promise to oppose any FISA bill which includes immunity for the telecommunications companies which unlawfully went along with President George W. Bush's program of warrantless wiretapping of ordinary American citizens.

It is at times like these, with our country on the brink of losing some of the greatest attributes that define us as a nation, that we must step up to the crucial role that destiny has handed us.

This is a defining moment in the history of our country. Do we let ourselves be taken into an age of fear, mistrust, and paranoia, forever feeling that we are being watched and that everyone is a spy?

Or do we hold our heads up, unafraid, and as Americans declare that enough is enough?

We don't want any more of the paranoid culture of fear that is seemingly the Bush administration's meager vision of our future. We are tired of being told that as Americans we must mistrust and be afraid.

We must stand, tall and united, against those who seek to turn the United States into a surveillance society. We must stand up and say "NO!" to those who would turn us into a nation of fearful, isolated citizens, fearing each other, fearing the government, fearing the massive technological complex which has been turned to the ignoble end of monitoring our every word in some misguided attempt to provide an illusory security at the very real cost of our highest ideals.

A government which operates on the basic belief that it must keep its citizens silent and fearful through some sort of all-seeing, all-hearing intelligence apparatus is a government which has already destroyed that which it seeks to defend.

If we forsake our highest ideals of liberty in the name of defending ourselves from a foreign enemy which seeks to take our freedom, then we have already handed them the victory which they seek. For in so doing we have indeed allowed them to destroy our greatness and our freedom by intimidating us into doing their work for them.

A proud group of your supporters who believe in your call for hope and a new kind of politics, and who also realize the importance of the FISA telecom immunity issue, has come together and organized themselves on your website. We are among your most loyal and enthusiastic supporters. Our group has already grown to more than 5,000 members in just a few days, and it continues to grow as I write this. Right now, it is ranked as the fifth largest group on mybarackobama.com.

Please, Senator Obama, reject the politics of fear on national security, vote against this bill and lead other Democrats to do the same!

A proud supporter,
Steve Elliott
Kingston, WA

To Those Who Want To Join The Group 'Senator Obama - Please Vote NO on Telecom Immunity - Get FISA Right'

In just three days, this has become the biggest Obama group centered around a specific issue, and the only group challenging one of Obama's positions.

If you already have an account at my.barackobama.com, just click on "Join Group" on the upper left portion of the page.

If you don't have an account, it's quick and easy to get one! Just click on "New Account" on the lower left portion of the page.

http://my.barackobama.com/page/group/SenatorObama-PleaseVoteAgainstFISA

"That means no more illegal wire-tapping of American citizens... That is not who we are. And it is not what is necessary to defeat the terrorists. The FISA court works. The separation of powers works. Our Constitution works. We will again set an example for the world that the law is not subject to the whims of stubborn rulers, and that justice is not arbitrary. This Administration acts like violating civil liberties is the way to enhance our security. It is not. There are no short-cuts to protecting America..."

~ Senator Barack Obama, August 1, 2007

http://www.barackobama.com/2007/08/01/remarks_of_senator_obama_the_w_1.php

http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/06/25/dodd/index.html

What Else Can You Do?

Click Here to learn what else you can do in the fight against telecom immunity provisions in FISA.

EFF Supports Senator Bingaman's Immunity Amendment: Congress Should Know What It is Immunizing

http://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2008/06/bingaman-amendment

The Nation: Obama Network Organizes and Revolts Over Spying

http://www.thenation.com/blogs/campaignmatters/333298/obama_network_organizes_and_revolts_over_spying

Wednesday, June 11, 2008

The Elitist Menace Among Us!

Have you heard about what an elitist Barack Obama is? If he's allowed to inject his elitist agenda into our nation's veins, before you know it, millionaires will be running the country. Can you imagine?

Stephen Colbert knows all about it, and last night he presented an informative educational film about the Elitist Menace. Duck and cover!


http://www.comedycentral.com/videos/index.jhtml?videoId=173088

Voting Republican?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FiQJ9Xp0xxU

John Cusack Presents The Bush/McCain Challenge






http://www.youtube.com/v/d9yd7uz4PpM&hl=en