DEA agent won’t admit heroin more harmful than marijuana

**CivilWars** · 06-23-12, 06:11 PM

How do you justify the millions, or even billions, spent on fighting the War on Drugs when the main target is MJ if you say it's not that bad? I don't agree with her, at all, but I understand why she did it.

**MaFioSo** · 06-23-12, 06:22 PM

Originally Posted by CivilWars

How do you justify the millions, or even billions, spent on fighting the War on Drugs when the main target is MJ if you say it's not that bad? I don't agree with her, at all, but I understand why she did it.

Yea I agree, I can see why she did it but I think it's stupid that were paying someone to lie to us. They really should legalize and regulate MJ BUT keep the same funding and really focus on the drugs that really do harm to people.

**deathgodusmc** · 06-23-12, 06:28 PM

Originally Posted by MaFioSo

She's the boss of the DEA, a government agency, not some privately owned corporation. Her fiduciary duty is to us, the American people. She is suppose to tell us the truth regardless of how it affects her funding, which the American people also pay for.

So are politicians and how far have we gotten with that so far?

**AetheLove** · 06-23-12, 06:42 PM

Originally Posted by MaFioSo

She wouldn't have gotten fired, shes the Chief Administrator nominated by Obama.

Oh please. You think that if she says, to Congress, "Yeah, I hear ya. Our resource allocation is way outta whack, and personally I think this whole "pot is illegal" thing is dumb and we ought to be studying other options.", that Obama's chief of staff won't be on the phone demanding her resignation within the hour?

Look at what happened to Joycelyn Elders.

Hot-button issues are a mine field, and someone is ALWAYS trying to get you to step on a mine.

Cheers,

AetheLove

**MaFioSo** · 06-23-12, 06:47 PM

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

So are politicians and how far have we gotten with that so far?

True, I agree with what your saying, but I'm saying it shouldn't be like that. Politicians are suppose to work for us but they don't, they work for themselves and the lobbyist that stuff their pockets with bribes (campaign contributions). With the current amount of registered lobbyist we have 8 lobbyist for every 1 congressman. Mind you, you don't have to register if your a lobbyist and many don't.

The whole system is messed up. Politicians are forced to take bribes, if they don't their competitors will and use that money for publicity and advertising. That is why you see so many politicians flip flopping on issues from time to time, their way of voting depends on who's writing the checks.

**deathgodusmc** · 06-23-12, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by MaFioSo

True, I agree with what your saying, but I'm saying it shouldn't be like that. Politicians are suppose to work for us but they don't, they work for themselves and the lobbyist that stuff their pockets with bribes (campaign contributions). With the current amount of registered lobbyist we have 8 lobbyist for every 1 congressman. Mind you, you don't have to register if your a lobbyist and many don't.

The whole system is messed up. Politicians are forced to take bribes, if they don't their competitors will and use that money for publicity and advertising. That is why you see so many politicians flip flopping on issues from time to time, their way of voting depends on who's writing the checks.

I agree with everything up to they are forced to take bribes. If it had anything to do with the people we would have laws enforced that have to do with lobbyists. Yet they next to never are. I would hardly call that a coincidence.

**MaFioSo** · 06-23-12, 06:56 PM

Originally Posted by AetheLove

Oh please. You think that if she says, to Congress, "Yeah, I hear ya. Our resource allocation is way outta whack, and personally I think this whole "pot is illegal" thing is dumb and we ought to be studying other options.", that Obama's chief of staff won't be on the phone demanding her resignation within the hour?

Look at what happened to Joycelyn Elders.

Hot-button issues are a mine field, and someone is ALWAYS trying to get you to step on a mine.

Cheers,

AetheLove

Why do people always do this? Instead of arguing a point, they exaggerate it and then proceed to make an argument against it. Sure it's easier but what's the point of that?

Again.....

I thought she could of at least said this:

Originally Posted by MaFioSo

"I think marijuana is extremely dangerous, addictive, and harmful....but yes it is less harmful then heroin or meth"

Your saying I thought she should say this:

Originally Posted by AetheLove

"Yeah, I hear ya. Our resource allocation is way outta whack, and personally I think this whole "pot is illegal" thing is dumb and we ought to be studying other options."

**deathgodusmc** · 06-23-12, 06:59 PM

Because AE is a deflecting gay bastard.

**MaFioSo** · 06-23-12, 07:00 PM

lol

**AetheLove** · 06-23-12, 07:20 PM

Originally Posted by MaFioSo

Why do people always do this? Instead of arguing a point, they exaggerate it and then proceed to make an argument against it. Sure it's easier but what's the point of that?

Mea culpa.

My example of what she was trying to avoid saying was over the top. I wasn't trying to dismiss your whole case, only respond to your assertion that - having been appointed by Obama - her job was secure (up to, say, the point of treason).

Congressmen who advocate reform of drug policy are trying to get her to say one thing. Congressmen who play on the other side of the net are praying for just that sort of ammunition to use in an election year.

I'm not surprised - at all - that she avoided it. It was sad to see. I wish it was different, and that the policy opinions of an enforcement professional could be part of the public debate, but that's a pretty big boat to rock.

Originally Posted by deathgodusmc

Because AE is a deflecting gay bastard. :)

Suck it, pal. :)

Æ