Cannabis' unlikely new crusader: Pat Robertson?

|
(20)
Praying for legalization?

File this one under #OKsure: Televangelist and all-around dubious individual Pat Robertson has come out in support of the decriminalization of marijuana.

Of course, it's all the liberals' fault. Robertson made the following comments on the March 1 episode of the 700 Club. (Many thanks to Tom Angell of Law Enforcement Against Prohibition for providing us with the link fest, lookit this hilarious retraction his network posted when Robertson made similar comments in December!)

Even though these prisoners may have been sentenced by some court for some offense, should they be behind bars? Here's the thing, we have over 3,000 – the number must be much higher than that, but over 3,000 federal crimes.

And every time the liberals pass a bill, I don't care what it involves! They stick criminal sanctions on it. They don't feel that there's any way that people are going to keep a wall unless they can put them in jail. And so we have the jails that are filled with people who are white collar criminals and I've became sort of a hero of the hippie culture I guess when I said I think we ought to decriminalize the possession of marijuana.

I just think it's shocking how many of these young people wind up in prison and they get turned into hardcore criminals because they had a possession of a very small amount of controlled substance. I mean, the whole thing is crazy! And we've said, we're conservatives, we're tough on crime – that's baloney! It's costing us billions and billions of dollars.

Look at California. California is spending more money on prisons than it spends on schools! I mean there's something wrong about the equation, there's something wrong. 

Here's the video itself (start at 20:40 and go until 29:25) -- the comments precede a pretty interesting segment on how the NAACP, the Tea Party, and a group called Prison Fellowship, a faith-based counseling group for prisoners and families founded by a Watergate ex-con and one-time Nixon aide.

Despite his classist assertion that white collar criminals shouldn't get jail time, we're with ya, homeslice. Hero of the hippie culture, yes you are. 

And so, our nominally-progressive president now has a less tenable position on the War on Drugs than one of our country's head crazies (who -- let us not forget despite his newfound stoner ways -- was the one who announced that Haiti was hit by those earthquakes in 2010 because it was "cursed" by a "pact to the devil.")

Holler back, President Obama? Personally, we'd be happy if his attorneys would just stop shutting down our local dispensaries

 

Comments

Thank you Pat Robertson. You have given me new hope for mankind.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 06, 2012 @ 8:33 pm

And this is why (actually one of many reasons) why I'm voting for Gary Johnson. He will decriminalize marijuana and pardon all non-violent convictions when it comes to possession. Robertson would not agree with Johnson's pro-choice stance, but I find it funny that Obama promised not to close dispensaries, yet has stepped up efforts from Bush days and Pat Robertson is calling for the end of criminalization of it.

Posted by Elizabeth on Mar. 06, 2012 @ 10:15 pm

There is another little gem in here, Pat claims that it is the liberals who are passing these laws, particularly the heavy sentences for possession of pot. OK...sounds reality based. Good thing those liberals shot down the conservatives attempt recently to pass prop 19 in California, huh?

Posted by Guest on Mar. 07, 2012 @ 7:15 am

Remember all. It was Bill Clinton that packed the federal jails with a million low level drug criminals. He doubled the prison population just so he can look "tough on crime". In any other country where a large part of the population are jailed SOLELY FOR POLITICAL REASONS, that leader would be vilified as a Fascist Despot. You can continue on, just blaming the Cons for the drug war but Obama and Holder prove that's a myth.

Posted by Guest no name on Mar. 07, 2012 @ 11:11 am

Remember all. It was Bill Clinton that packed the federal jails with a million low level drug criminals. He doubled the prison population just so he can look "tough on crime". In any other country where a large part of the population are jailed SOLELY FOR POLITICAL REASONS, that leader would be vilified as a Fascist Despot. You can continue on, just blaming the Cons for the drug war but Obama and Holder prove that's a myth.

Posted by Guest no name on Mar. 07, 2012 @ 11:13 am

But yes, being "tough on crime" isn't just a Republican hobby. The simple fact is that Americans hate crime and criminals, and vote accordingly.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 07, 2012 @ 12:06 pm

Politicians insist on locking up pot smokers to prove they are "tough on crime" so they can win elections. There is no other basis for tough drug laws other than to amass political power for those pushing it. How can the drug war being any more political than that? Do you really believe the drug war was a response from the grass roots? NO! It was a policy engineered by Rockefeller and then taken on by Nixon in order to vilify a large portion on the population. The drug war has been nothing other than politicians locking people up to keep their own personal power (i.e., Fascism).

Posted by Guest no name on Mar. 07, 2012 @ 12:47 pm

To get serious time you're either selling or doing something much more serious and harmful.

And anyway, isn't it mosty a State thing? Somewhere like Texas is notoriously strict while, in California, anyone who wants to buy some pot can just fake a backache and get a script.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 07, 2012 @ 1:01 pm

When I first got a job when I was 16 in the mid 1970s, one women I worked with had a boyfriend who had done 3 years in Huntsville prison, Texas for possession of three joints in the late 1960s. Perhaps the fact that he was Mexican had something to do with it?

Posted by marcos on Mar. 08, 2012 @ 7:38 am

But nice of you to stop by and drop a race card anyway.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 08, 2012 @ 9:31 am

"The law in Dallas, from all appearances, had been bent on getting Stoney Burns for years" when they "found in the glove compartment a tiny stash of marijuana. It was barely enough for one or two joints." But it was enough to get Stoney a sentence of 10 years and one day -- time he never served thanks to Texas Governor Dolph Briscoe who commuted the sentence.

http://sixties-l.blogspot.com/2011/05/dallas-underground-icon-stoney-bur...

My dad knew Stoney Burns once we moved to Dallas. Indeed dad moved us from NY to TX in order to escape the Rockefeller drug laws imposed during the economic collapse there in the early 1970s as TX's pot laws were more liberal than NY.

You gotta know that few Latinos or blacks had Dolph Briscoe reviewing their cases like this. The ever expanding Texas Department of Criminal Justice memorialized Briscoe with his own maximum security incarceration facility.

Posted by marcos on Mar. 08, 2012 @ 10:13 am

bearing on whatw e 9are talking about here?

Again, white drug dealers and users get jail too. So your race card just got trumped.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 09, 2012 @ 9:20 am

specious logic. minorities represent a disproportionate amount of the prison population while whites are just as likely to commit the same amount of crimes per capita. the drug war is the new jim crow social control and the 'color blind' advocates fail to see the reality of how policing is actually done and how the courts give harsher sentences to minorities.

Posted by Guest no name on Mar. 08, 2012 @ 10:26 am

to back this up?

Posted by color blind and entitled on Mar. 09, 2012 @ 8:31 am

more because the criminal justice system is unfair on the poor. And the poor tend to be non-white more than white.

A rich black who can afford a lawyer will get better treatment than a poor white who cannot.

So unless you want to impose some type of communism and make everyone equally wealthy, I think you're missing the point here.

Posted by Guest on Mar. 09, 2012 @ 9:21 am

it's not just a state thing. ever hear of federalism? fed law trumps state law. in addition, the dea classifies pot as more dangerous than opiates. no real studies on the true impact of pot can be done w/o federal approval and states justify their own laws on federal law and the federal propaganda. and regardless if you smoke one joint or large scale farming, there is no legitimate reason to claim that pot is so dangerous that it requires locking up anyone...the ONLY reason the drug war persists is politicians want to keep their own power. that is why no one will support any decriminalization since they fear losing elections to a well financed fear mongers who would use any attempt to decriminalize pot as evidence their opponent is "weak on crime"...and you know it.

Posted by Guest no name on Mar. 07, 2012 @ 2:38 pm

Wow. It is officially 2012 and things are getting weird. Pat Robertson is making sense? What's next, is Obama going to do something intelligent? The end is near...

Posted by Joey on Mar. 08, 2012 @ 8:46 am

Was it chilly in hell today? Actually good for him. He's right.

Posted by EBL on Mar. 08, 2012 @ 8:12 pm

the man is clearly desparate for a new audience. First he says someone can divorce their spouse if the person has alzieheimers, now this.
He is clearly not in touch with what clear to us who believe in Christ.
He is not in touch with reality Pot is not legal, therefore all in the jails wanted to be caught.
Criminals do illegal things. The rest of us do not.

It is that simple.

Posted by Honestthought on Mar. 08, 2012 @ 9:35 pm

"All in Jail wanted to get caught"?

Posted by Guest on Mar. 09, 2012 @ 7:10 am

Related articles

  • Panther medicine

    An original member of the Black Panther connects the dots between marijuana access and justice

  • Narc fetish

    Weed vs. cancer, Fiona Apple vs. fascists

  • Roseanne vs. mind control

    Everyone's favorite sitcom queen may have been high when she decided to run for president -- and she's not apologizing for it

  • Also from this author