Another Drug Czar Rumor
Pete Guither has the details. I agree with Pete that we’re just not going to know who the next drug czar is for a while still, but it’s worth noting that none of the names circulating thus far are very encouraging.
If we end up disappointed, it will be our own fault for thinking Obama’s nominee wouldn’t completely suck.
Agreed
Comment posted by Scott Morgan on Mon, 11/17/2008 - 11:26pmYou are correct. Except I'd say "politically necessary" instead of expedient. It may well be expedient at times to continue on the path we're already on. I'm prepared to concede that it would take a fair amount of effort to sell meaningful reform, even now. There will be resistance. But it can be done.
Now that Obama has voiced the need for reform, he cannot justify failing to move the conversation forward. His selection for drug czar will reveal a great deal about the strength of his commitment to improving our drug policy.
Another Secret Society Minion
Comment posted by Anonymous on Mon, 11/17/2008 - 11:37pmhttp://freedomofmedicineanddiet.blogspot.com/2008/11/masonic-frat-member...
This guy is a "recovering alcoholic" yet he is opposed to even the limited medical use of the infinitely safer substance of Marijuana- what a fraternal tool!
Sorry, folks...
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 11/18/2008 - 2:28amI never believed anything Obama said to begin with. "'Change' we can believe in..." now THAT'S some funny stuff! I don't care who you are - if you are a politician, you are CORRUPT in some shape, form or fashion. That's especially true of politicians who are *lawyers* and former *senators*!
I predict Obama will give us at least four years of Bill Clinton-type policies, minus an intern "fellatio-fest" debacle. Indeed, I predict soaring drug arrest and incarceration rates, asset forfeiture gone-wild and continually declining civil liberties. It's the course we've been on for some time now, and it won't change until things get so bad that it absolutely must change. Even then, it won't be politicians who will do the changing - it will be average Americans taking to the streets with tar and feathers and demanding change...or else!
Obama's present choices are horribly discouraging. Take rabid drug warrior Rahm Emanuel (...seriously, take him), who is a good example of the reality of Obama's supposed "middle-of-the-road" approach! I'll really be impressed when (and IF) we finally elect someone smart enough to know that The United States of America is not RUSSIA, and therefore requires no "czar" of any kind!!!
I'm cynical, you say? Guilty as charged! But don't worry, I never believed McCain, either. I'd rather have a social liberal in the White House over a social conservative ANY day of the week. I voted for Bob Barr, which I acknowledge was an exercise in futility, but at least I can sleep at night! Thanks for letting me rant, I feel much better now.
News Flash: Change never has trickled down from the White House
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 11/18/2008 - 3:41amThere are plenty of elitists that will fool you into thinking you need some special credentials to make change. However, our noble "Change you can believe in" Presidents of the past would never have lifted a finger to end the injustices of their time if it weren't for the many brave ordinary folks demanding their attention and in some extreme cases getting their asses kicked in front of the media. The same applies to Obama.
It's time to tell the world that you can absolutely hate marijuana with fire in your eyes and still have the most stake in seeing that a regulated market becomes a reality. Marijuana prohibition only prohibits marijuana regulation!! No more dealers in our schools!! Stop making criminals richer!! Protect our communities. Regulate Now!!
Voting for either a Dem or Rep is an exercise in futility
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 11/18/2008 - 3:46amEvery election those of us who know that the duopoly is corrupt, and that the vast majority of those elected are sold out whores, try to tell the rest of the populace to stop voting for either half of that duopoly. We point out how the current president and congress have made the government bigger, more intrusive, more costly, more authoritarian than the previous president and congress, and we predict that all of the candidates who are members of the duopoly will just continue, and may even speed up, that trend. No one listens to us, most voters (even those who, in actuality, philosophically support some other political paradigm, like libertarianism) give us the excuse, "we've got to get rid of the evil we have in office by voting for the 'lesser evil' seeking that office" (or some variation of that excuse). And yet, each time it is proven to us that the "lesser evil" is just as evil as the previous evil, if not more so.
Please, pay attention to how things are now, then look again in two years when some members of congress are up for re-election; if the government is even bigger, and more intrusive, and more costly, and more authoritarian at that point than it is now (and I can practically guarantee that it will be), please stop voting for those evils who made it that way! Vote outside the box, vote for the libertarian if that is the plitical philosophy you find closest to your own, vote Green if that is your bent, vote NOTA (none of the above), but do NOT vote for any Democrat or any Republican or even any so called Independent who really isn't independent in thought, ever again, in any race -- local, state or federal. If the American people would desert, in droves, those two parties, we'd see change happen a whole lot faster than anyone would have believed. We'd have a peaceful revolution, and there would be no need for a violent one.
IF this country puts a Green or Libertarian in the White House
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 11/18/2008 - 4:17pm... it will only be a reflection of what society already has become. Change comes from the ground up.
Obama Will Not Make Bill Clinton's Mistake
Comment posted by Giordano on Tue, 11/18/2008 - 7:53pmObama’s changes to the Drug War will need to be below the radar of the crusading prohibitionists if progress is to be made.
Bill Clinton injected too much change too fast when he lifted restrictions on gays in the military. For his act of emancipation, the culturally shocked religious right rebuked Clinton for the remainder of his terms as president. Something similar would happen if Obama drastically scaled down the drug war too fast.
Many ways exist to fly safely below the drug warriors’ radar on legal reform. For instance, by employing the same logic he uses to restore federal funding for embryonic stem cell research, Obama could also lift the bizarre NIDA policy requirement that all scientific research emphasize the pathological aspects of psychotropic drugs while avoiding or ignoring an illicit drug’s benefits. A solid consensus among emancipated American scientists on this topic, one unfettered by political dogma, would remove a host of future opportunities for anti-drug propagandists who seek to perpetuate the drug war.
Something else likely to draw Obama’s attention to the Drug War is the unequal enforcement of the drug laws based on race. For most Americans, the race issue in the Drug War is a nasty can of worms just waiting to be opened. In fact, close-ups of the Drug War in any of its aspects are never pretty. Public revelations of racial discrimination and other injustices will further burden an unsteady American drug policy that appears ready to collapse under its own weight.
Still another critical change that would help bring accountability to the Drug Czar’s office would be for Congress and the President to revoke the ONDCP’s ‘License to Lie’. This can be achieved by simply changing the ONDCP’s charter, which in its present wording effectively elicits acts of open-ended fraud perpetrated by drug warriors against U.S. citizens.
Encompassing a common groundwork of fairness, equity, legitimate scientific data and government accountability, drug law reformers will be given more opportunities to change the drug laws from the bottom up. It’s well within Obama’s powers and our own to make it happen.
Giordano
Giordano,
Comment posted by Anonymous on Tue, 11/18/2008 - 11:08pmYou make a great argument, and I agree with you! However, while Obama CAN make the changes, I'm wagering that he won't. I nominate YOU, Giordano, for drug czar (Ron Paul was a good idea, too)! Maybe then we'll get something done!
Thanks but no thanks...
Comment posted by Giordano on Wed, 11/19/2008 - 3:47amI'm not qualified to be the Drug Czar. I have a conscience. Drug Czars don't.
One step at a time...
Comment posted by Anonymous on Wed, 11/19/2008 - 11:22am...slowly he creeps, to the center of the road.It would be a vast improvement if pot were re-scheduled. And if ONDCP were re-chartered. And if there was re-search into use ,as oppossed to abuse. It's not really "change", so much as, re-assessment.Political propriety...scheech.














digg
reddit






I disagree
Comment posted by Anonymous on Mon, 11/17/2008 - 9:03pmIf we end up disappointed, it will be because Obama's promises of "hope" and "change" were complete bullshit. Continuing the Drug War is not "change," nor is it intelligent, justifiable, or even politically expedient anymore.