178
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 62 points 6 months ago

Please tell me Fat Joe is Joe Biden. Please god please

[-] Lifecoach5000@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

🤣 that made me spit

[-] candyman337@sh.itjust.works 42 points 6 months ago

Convenient timing given everything else going on. You know they're really scrambling to get the youth vote when they start talking about nationwide marijuana legalization.

[-] Deceptichum@sh.itjust.works 17 points 6 months ago

All they seem to do is talk, zero intent behind the words.

[-] CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world 30 points 6 months ago

The DEA is currently investigating rescheduling marijuana which was prompted by Biden’s HHS doing the preliminary lab work to present to them.

Then Biden has pardoned everyone who was charged federally for possession of marijuana.

And then he urged states to consider doing the same. Just this week, Massachusetts followed through with that.

Obviously he’s doing this to get more voters, but there’s real progress happening and it’s not a reaction to anything recent. This was all indicated during his campaigning.

[-] astrsk@piefed.social 13 points 6 months ago

Yeah, like, what do people expect? Of course they’ll do good things to get re-elected. That’s literally how this works! I don’t get the people who argue “it’s just for getting votes”. Yes, that’s how it works.

[-] fathog@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

Motherfucker did this in 2020. Yeah, it’s cool, but as a former president said, fool me once, can’t fool me again

[-] rambaroo@lemmynsfw.com 3 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

People want leaders who give a damn about them not lying charlatans who use them. It isn't that hard to understand.

Cynics like you are the reason we keep electing neoliberal trash who fuck workers over. All you do is make excuses for them.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] dhork@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

Isn't "doing this to get more votes" what politicians are supposed to be doing, though? They are supposed to be responsive to people's concerns, so those people prefer them to the other alternatives when it comes time to vote?

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 36 points 6 months ago

If the Democrats wanted to do something for the people, they'd really lean into legalizing cannabis at the federal level.

[-] rambaroo@lemmynsfw.com 10 points 6 months ago

We need workers rights more than legal weed, but you'll notice the Democrats never talk about that.

[-] Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago

Sure they do! They talked about how if rail workers were allowed to strike, the entire economy would instantly collapse forever.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 34 points 6 months ago

So when is it time to start talking about all the reparations the US owes to the millions of people it victimized throughout it's (so-called) "War On Drugs" terror campaign?

[-] bruhbeans@lemmy.ml 17 points 6 months ago

Illinois codified in law when it legalized cannabis that licenses for product development (the grow houses, dispensaries, maunfacture, etc) was supposed to go to the people most affected by the war on drugs. These communities were 90% Black. There's a new dispensary opening by me, and it's ownership is 100% white male lawyers, and they sell nothing but Cresco Labs products, which is run a buncha rich white dudes.

[-] billiam0202@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

As a white male, I'll have you know that the war on drugs did affect us more than anyone else!

Also the war on women, the war on Christmas, the war on terrorism, the war on freedom, the US Civil War, Edwin Starr's song "War", Angels and Airwaves' song "The War", the war room scene from Dr. Strangelove, Star Wars the movie, Star Wars the missile defense initiative, and the war on belly fat all disproportionately affect we white males more than any other group. Don't you know how we're the most oppressed?

[-] masquenox@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

which is run a buncha rich white dudes.

It's the same damn thing here in South Africa - the politicians are constantly talking about "legalizing" marijuana use for the politically-connected (and mostly white) rich people who have the infrastructure to sell it en masse to foreign countries while still leaving enough legalese in there to allow the pig to wage war on the impoverished black and brown folk who farms the stuff.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] Huckledebuck@sh.itjust.works 6 points 6 months ago

The war on drugs created so many problems across multiple generations and multiple continents. Millions is a very low estimate.

[-] Hubbubbub@fedia.io 30 points 6 months ago

So the Biden campaign is running on abortion and pot. Yeah, I'm OK with that.

[-] NegativeInf@lemmy.world 13 points 6 months ago

Don't forget climate, and democracy.

[-] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

Importantly, Harris is. This will give her beer positioning to step up if needed this campaign season.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 10 points 6 months ago

Importantly, Harris is. This will give her beer positioning to step up if needed this campaign season.

I know it's a typo, but I can see Brett Kavanaugh swearing her in on a stack of kegs

[-] Tolookah@discuss.tchncs.de 6 points 6 months ago

Yep typo, I'm leaving it though. I'm sure many Americans would accept being sworn in on Beer instead of the Bible.

[-] dhork@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

It depends on which beer, though. Does swearing an oath over Bud Light mean anything?

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] intensely_human@lemm.ee 5 points 6 months ago

Just like last time

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 29 points 6 months ago

The grid-locked Congress could also make some progress on cannabis reform this year, with Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer telling reporters last week that the bipartisan SAFER Banking Act — a bill that would expand access to traditional banking and financial institutions for legal cannabis businesses — could get a vote on the floor before the November election.

If Biden declassified it, then there'd be no restrictions on banking...

If a state doesn't specifically have a law making it illegal, declassifying federal would make it defacto legal.

It's honestly that simple, and declassifying it was his compromise four years ago when voters wanted legalization.

He's spent four years looking into it...

And now he's promising again to look into it

Just take the easy common sense win that does zero harm. He keeps fucking up these easy issues.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 8 points 6 months ago

Well, why finally do it, if promising to do it gets you approval.

[-] rambaroo@lemmynsfw.com 5 points 6 months ago

For real. They haven't actually done shit yet. All these shills posting articles about Biden ordering the rescheduling prices to begin doesn't mean shit. It's literally the bare minimum he can do.

The DEA will keep it illegal and Biden won't do shit to retaliate, he'll say his hands are tied and the Democrat trash here will actually defend him for it.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (15 replies)
[-] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 18 points 6 months ago

I'm guessing there was nobody more relevant than Fat Joe after Killer Mike became persona non grata and Snoop favors Trump.

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 14 points 6 months ago

At least nobody else willing to stand next to the DARE cop in the auditorium.

[-] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 9 points 6 months ago

It counts as community service ffs.

[-] givesomefucks@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Eh, that was kind of overblown.

She had more prosecutions than the prior DA, but most weren't jail time, it was just get caught pay a fine.

And it makes sense when that became a thing, people were riskier with it and got caught more.

She's been pro legalization for almost a decade.

They're not doing enough right now, but it's not like she was some hardcore soldier in the drug war.

Biden on the other hand...

https://www.congress.gov/bill/101st-congress/senate-bill/3266

https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/may/30/joe-biden/joe-biden-1994-crime-bill-mass-incarceration/

He was behind a lot of the early 90s police bullshit that we're still dealing with today.

What's fucked up is it coincided with the same drop in violent crime from banning leaded gas that every country saw. So some people still think that backwards ass shit works Plus, they were usually alive for decades before the ban and exposed to all that lead for decades...

Shit fucks with your brain, especially as you age

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 4 points 6 months ago

Like I said in another comment.

If she does a bong rip on stage, she's got my vote.

[-] return2ozma@lemmy.world 8 points 6 months ago

I mean it's better than nothing. It's always funny to me how they start doing everything during an election year when they could have done this 3 years ago.

[-] protist@mander.xyz 10 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

In May 2021, the Drug Enforcement Administration approved licensed facilities to grow cannabis for the purpose of medical research for the first time since 1968. Prior to this, the University of Mississippi was the only institution in the United States legally permitted to grow the plant for that use. Previously, in 2016, an application process was put in place for research growers, but no applications were later approved under the Trump administration.

In October 2022, President Biden announced a mass pardon for past federal cannabis possession convictions, encouraged governors to do the same for state cannabis possession convictions, and instructed Attorney General Merrick Garland and Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra to review the classification schedule of marijuana, which could result in removal of cannabis from Schedule I of the Controlled Substances Act.

On December 2, 2022, Biden signed the Medical Marijuana and Cannabidiol Research Expansion Act.

Also: https://www.forbes.com/sites/sarahsinclair/2024/01/18/dea-considers-rescheduling-cannabis-what-this-means-for-us-and-global-reform/

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] Death_Equity@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

That's how you know they don't actually care and it is all political games.

[-] Patches@sh.itjust.works 3 points 6 months ago

What did Killer Mike do now?

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[-] BobGnarley@lemm.ee 7 points 6 months ago

Would take maybe tops 4 hours for them to draft the executive order to make that shit legal overnight. But, cool I guess?

[-] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 6 points 6 months ago

If she hits a gravity bong on stage, fuck it, Harris can take the wheel.

[-] AdolfSchmitler@lemmy.world 5 points 6 months ago

Yeah they dangle this carrot in front of us every 4 years but never do a god damn thing about it.

[-] MonkCanatella@sh.itjust.works 4 points 6 months ago

lol this will backfire. Even if they committed to it “after the election” no one will believe it, and trump and co could just be like god empeoreor trump has declared he will legalize weed on day one of his dictatorship and the fucking morons that follow him would actually suddenly be pro legalization

[-] mr_tyler_durden@lemmy.world 3 points 6 months ago

If it’s legalized at a federal level then we better get a “We did it Joe!” video (like we got after winning the election)

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2024
178 points (95.4% liked)

politics

18870 readers
3818 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
  2. Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
  3. Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
  4. No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
  5. Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
  6. No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

That's all the rules!

Civic Links

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS