logo 
spacer
  

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

If you have an opinion, you should share it! Register Now!

America's Debate hosts the best in news, government, and political debate. Register now to take part in the most civil and constructive debate on the Internet. Join the community, and get ready to be challenged!

Click here to start

> Sponsored Links

Register to remove these ads!
> Should political candidates be drug screened?, Please respond not just here, but to Congress!
Curmudgeon
post Oct 10 2016, 05:06 PM
Post #1


********
I am an unpaid protester!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,193
Member No.: 729
Joined: May-14-03

From: Michigan
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



I watched the debate on September 29 and I thought, is Donald ill or on drugs?

I watched the Presidential Debate on October 9 and I did a Google Search for Symptoms of Cocaine Use.

Donald was again routinely sniffing before he answered a question, interrupting constantly, shouting as though he wasn't certain his mike was on. At one point he was standing behind Hillary Clinton to either photo bomb her or prove that he was taller... He described his attitude towards women as "locker room talk." (I am about his age, and I have not heard that kind of "locker room talk" since I was last in a locker room full of seventh graders at a time when Eisenhower was the President of the United States.

Apparently I was not alone in my suspicions. Donald Trump's Sniffling Continues, Here Now Are The Possible Causes was a question posed in an article in Forbes... (This is a fun read, alternate theories are that he is taking Viagra through his nose or that he may be pregnant.)

I lost a lot of sleep. Then I went to http://www.senate.gov/senators/states.htm and https://www.house.gov/ and I sent the following message to my Representative and to my Senators:



Subject: Is Donald Trump using a performance enhancing drug?

If I recall correctly, Congress cannot pass a law which applies to a single individual. A law, however, which impacts a group of ten individuals might be permitted if it is in the national interest.

As a citizen, I have witnessed a candidate in two presidential debates who appeared to be on drugs as he bragged about his juvenile locker room behavior and sniffed loudly before every question he answered.

Someone who was interviewing for any lower position in the Federal Government, at Mc Donald's, at Wal-Mart, etc. would be expected to pass a drug screening before their application was processed further and to agree to random drug testing while they are employed.

I am proposing that a bipartisan agreement might be reached before this year's Federal Elections take place which requires all current and future Presidents, Vice Presidents, Presidential Candidates and Vice Presidential Candidates to pass the same type of routine drug testing that virtually every employer in America already requires.



Sending a message to the White House appeared to be an infinite loop which I could not escape.

I would encourage others to copy and paste my message, or to paraphrase my message, or to write your Congressman and say "I truly believe America will be Great again once this cokehead is President."

I doubt if anyone could get a search warrant to have Donald J. Trump investigated for drug trafficking before the Election; but the message needs to get out there that Donald J. Trump is after all, still a job applicant at this point, and not above the law.

Would you being willing to take action on this issue? Pro or Con?

This post has been edited by Curmudgeon: Oct 10 2016, 06:19 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
 
Start new topic
Replies (1 - 13)
LoneWisdom
post Oct 10 2016, 06:44 PM
Post #2


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 118
Member No.: 8,384
Joined: February-10-08

From: Georgia
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



QUOTE(Curmudgeon @ Oct 10 2016, 01:06 PM) *
I watched the debate on September 29 and I thought, is Donald ill or on drugs?

I watched the Presidential Debate on October 9 and I did a Google Search for Symptoms of Cocaine Use.

Donald was again routinely sniffing before he answered a question, interrupting constantly, shouting as though he wasn't certain his mike was on. At one point he was standing behind Hillary Clinton to either photo bomb her or prove that he was taller... He described his attitude towards women as "locker room talk." (I am about his age, and I have not heard that kind of "locker room talk" since I was last in a locker room full of seventh graders at a time when Eisenhower was the President of the United States.

I lost a lot of sleep. Then I went to http://www.senate.gov/senators/states.htm and https://www.house.gov/ and I sent the following message to my Representative and to my Senators:



Subject: Is Donald Trump using a performance enhancing drug?

If I recall correctly, Congress cannot pass a law which applies to a single individual. A law, however, which impacts a group of ten individuals might be permitted if it is in the national interest.

As a citizen, I have witnessed a candidate in two presidential debates who appeared to be on drugs as he bragged about his juvenile locker room behavior and sniffed loudly before every question he answered.

Someone who was interviewing for any lower position in the Federal Government, at Mc Donald's, at Wal-Mart, etc. would be expected to pass a drug screening before their application was processed further and to agree to random drug testing while they are employed.

I am proposing that a bipartisan agreement might be reached before this year's Federal Elections take place which requires all current and future Presidents, Vice Presidents, Presidential Candidates and Vice Presidential Candidates to pass the same type of routine drug testing that virtually every employer in America already requires.



Sending a message to the White House appeared to be an infinite loop which I could not escape.

I would encourage others to copy and paste my message, or to paraphrase my message, or to write your Congressman and say "I truly believe America will be Great again once this cokehead is President."

I doubt if anyone could get a search warrant to have Donald J. Trump investigated for drug trafficking before the Election; but the message needs to get out there that Donald J. Trump is after all, still a job applicant at this point, and not above the law.

Would you being willing to take action on this issue? Pro or Con?


The narratives presented by this site continue to astound me. This narrative sounds like Partisan Derangement Syndrome.

So... the adult content industry is successful due to the fantasies of seventh graders? Perhaps one can stretch the narrative to assume fantasy is reality?

I've run into a few men in my life that talk like Trump... a few women too. I don't care for it, but I usually just dismiss it as bravado or fantasy. I haven't heard of Trump actually following up on that kind of talk, not to say people that fantasize this way don't give in to opportunities. I think several of our past presidents actually acted out theirs. Do you think the majority of the consumers of adult content give in their fantasies? Maybe these two guys were just having a Hollywood moment. He certainly didn't seem disrespectful to the woman they greeted.

Test Trump for cocaine use? What exactly would use of cocaine do for him? A little more than one those new high-energy drinks? I don't know. All the serious drug users I've dealt with were on the needle, or the crack pipe. I don't think you'll have to worry about any of them having the ambition to run for public office. Perhaps Hillary is juicing steroids too. Maybe this proposed law wouldn't see the light of day due to both sides of the isle using drugs.

Should we treat candidates like professional or Olympic athletes? Maybe we can start a campaign to denigrate politicians until they give in to drug testing... similar to what they do to politicians not turning over their tax returns, which also isn't one the requirements to be a candidate.


Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Curmudgeon
post Oct 10 2016, 11:22 PM
Post #3


********
I am an unpaid protester!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,193
Member No.: 729
Joined: May-14-03

From: Michigan
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(LoneWisdom @ Oct 10 2016, 02:44 PM) *
The narratives presented by this site continue to astound me. This narrative sounds like Partisan Derangement Syndrome.

So... the adult content industry is successful due to the fantasies of seventh graders? Perhaps one can stretch the narrative to assume fantasy is reality?

I've run into a few men in my life that talk like Trump... a few women too. I don't care for it, but I usually just dismiss it as bravado or fantasy. I haven't heard of Trump actually following up on that kind of talk, not to say people that fantasize this way don't give in to opportunities. I think several of our past presidents actually acted out theirs. Do you think the majority of the consumers of adult content give in their fantasies? Maybe these two guys were just having a Hollywood moment. He certainly didn't seem disrespectful to the woman they greeted.

Test Trump for cocaine use? What exactly would use of cocaine do for him? A little more than one those new high-energy drinks? I don't know. All the serious drug users I've dealt with were on the needle, or the crack pipe. I don't think you'll have to worry about any of them having the ambition to run for public office. Perhaps Hillary is juicing steroids too. Maybe this proposed law wouldn't see the light of day due to both sides of the isle using drugs.

Should we treat candidates like professional or Olympic athletes? Maybe we can start a campaign to denigrate politicians until they give in to drug testing... similar to what they do to politicians not turning over their tax returns, which also isn't one the requirements to be a candidate.


Watch tapes of the last debate! Donald J. Trump personally described his remarks regarding women he was working with as "just locker room talk." It was not "Partisan Derangement Syndrome."

When I was in the workforce over twenty years ago, we had to go through annual sensitivity training so that we clearly understood that speaking that way to or about another employee while we were on the job constituted grounds for discharge. The Union backed the company position on that issue. During the training sessions, we were always informed that this annual training was prescribed by Federal Law. I have to presume that the entertainment industry was not exempted from those Federal Laws. I was taught annually (skipping class was grounds for discharge) that if you are sexually harassed while on the job and your employer is involved in Interstate Commerce, you have the right to sue both the harasser and the employer if the situation is not corrected.

The last time I heard men on the job with me discuss women in such fashion while on the job was 1965. I was working in a small factory where my brother, myself, and the owner's son were the only High School graduates. My foreman was illiterate, and the other two men on my crew had dropped out of Elementary School at 16 when the school would not give them Driver's Training. When they discussed their sex lives, it was always about the women they had met in bars.

It was a few years back that a friend asked my wife and I to meet him in a bar. We walked in and some jackass stretched his leg out between us and tried to pick up one of us as his next sexual conquest... I am still uncertain which of us he was trying to pick up, but we left and canceled the planned meeting. We have never returned to that bar. I personally do not want someone like that Jackass representing my nation as the best leader we could find! I've seen enough of "Donald Sniffles Trump!" I voted earlier today! Arguing with me personally will not change how I voted!

Back on topic, I was tested for drugs before I was hired in 1966 and I have not seen a help wanted sign in the twenty years since I retired that did not specify that applicants would be tested for drugs. If entry level jobs require compliance with the laws of the land, why should we exempt the people who create and enforce the laws?

The Forbes article cited in my original post suggested that Trump might not be sniffing Cocaine, it might be Viagra or birth control pills...

This post has been edited by Curmudgeon: Oct 10 2016, 11:40 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Oct 11 2016, 11:22 AM
Post #4


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,353
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



I'm not willing to take action on this issue other than voting for Clinton, which has been my plan since she got the nomination.

Trump never had a chance with me, nor does the Libertarian Party since after I examined it closely during the 2000 election season.

I do think it's pretty bad when a candidate like Trump shows up with a cocaine nose. I'm pretty sure it's not Viagra or estrogen because he isn't getting any and hasn't developed a huge, luxurious rack.

Crystal meth maybe, but that might be too small-league for him. Could be prescription crank from his doctor/dealer.

I don't see drug screening working in the private sector, so I don't see how it could work in the public sector. But it would be funny if Nurse Judy, played by Judge Judy, were to show up on the debate stage with P cups in hand.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Mrs. Pigpen
post Oct 11 2016, 12:25 PM
Post #5


Group Icon

**********
Carpe noctum

Sponsor
June 2003

Group: Moderators
Posts: 7,328
Member No.: 598
Joined: March-12-03

Gender: Female
Politics: Slightly Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



Yes, I do think political candidates should be drug screened.
Soldiers an medical workers are routinely tested because they are placed in a position of public trust.
How much more the supreme Commander in Chief over them all!
So, yes, YES YES. Drug test them. Preferably before the nomination.
Viagra (which I have no doubt Trump uses) isn't a controlled substance. They don't test for that one and it isn't necessary.

But Xanax and amphetamines and so forth, most definitely.
(I do not think this would bode well for Hillary either however)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dingo
post Oct 11 2016, 04:06 PM
Post #6


**********
Elite Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 5,065
Member No.: 225
Joined: November-3-02

From: Monterey Bay, Calif.
Gender: Male
Politics: Independent
Party affiliation: Private



Would you being willing to take action on this issue? Pro or Con?
On balance I'm uneasy about going down the drug testing road. What drug would disqualify you? Marijuana, some prescribed opioid for pain management? During the Cuban missile crisis would we have been better off under the puritanical Richard Nixon or the loaded to the eye balls Jack Kennedy? Winston Churchill from what I understand drank alcoholically to manage his depression unlike the vegetarian teetotaler Hitler.

I really don't see a shortcut to requiring a minimum of good judgement on the part of the voters. The rise of Donald Trump would seem to suggest that some kind of Gresham's Law of politics is taking over. But that problem rests squarely in the hands of the public not with the totally unqualified salesman crotch grabber who I understand is quite restrained for instance in the areas of alcohol (Apparently due to the death of an alcoholic brother) and cigarettes and has passed that prohibition on to his kids.

I certainly think a thorough medical check-up, much like displaying one's tax returns, should be expected and the appropriate suspicions could be drawn if like Trump they refuse or skirt around it with a lot of phony baloney but for the time being I'd rather keep drug testing voluntary for prospective candidates.

This post has been edited by Dingo: Oct 11 2016, 04:08 PM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gray Seal
post Oct 11 2016, 06:30 PM
Post #7


********
Millennium Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 2,405
Member No.: 335
Joined: December-12-02

From: Edwardsville, IL
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



There would be more interesting information on a urine or blood test than on a 1040. It would be interesting to know what medications they are receiving.

I would not make urine test or blood test mandatory, not any different from medical records nor income tax forms.

It would be interesting to have independent groups hosting true Presidential forum/debates. Perhaps they would add a urine test to qualifying to participate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
droop224
post Oct 12 2016, 02:25 AM
Post #8


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Group: Members
Posts: 2,816
Member No.: 3,073
Joined: May-12-04

Gender: Male
Politics: Very Liberal
Party affiliation: None



Absolutely not. America still needs to grow up. Lets for the argument state that Obama still smokes weed, Clinton is on some prescription opioid, and "The Donald" snorts coke. So what? None of these people could make it to the level they are if they were substance abusers. Its one thing to be a functional drug user, but the success these people have attained individually shows that these people are exceptional regardless of drug use.

Trump is Trump, whether he snorts coke or not. The same could be said for the other individuals.

If you think someone doing an illegal drugs, can give you understanding on someone's character, you are absolutely wrong. You are just following programming given to you as a child and young adult. Sure, you can see that this individual is willing to commit crime, but who isn't.

The Presidency already has its constitutional requirements. You have ample enough information of a politicians character by the time you have to vote when it comes to president. And to be honest as I look at our Presidential candidates, this issue is with us not them.

This post has been edited by droop224: Oct 12 2016, 02:28 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LoneWisdom
post Oct 16 2016, 02:17 AM
Post #9


*****
Century Mark

Group: Members
Posts: 118
Member No.: 8,384
Joined: February-10-08

From: Georgia
Gender: Male
Politics: Undisclosed
Party affiliation: None



Looks like Trump is making the first move...

Donald Trump Says Hillary Clinton Should Be Drug-Tested Before Final Presidential Debate - WSJ
QUOTE
Donald Trump said Hillary Clinton is getting "pumped up" before Wednesday's presidential debate and suggested the candidates should be drug-tested before it takes place.


This post has been edited by LoneWisdom: Oct 16 2016, 02:28 AM
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Oct 16 2016, 07:48 PM
Post #10


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,353
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



At this point, I don't think the rantings of Trump should be taken seriously.

As for drug testing, that takes too much time for the upcoming debate. I'm not sure how it'd have to be worked legally, as in if legislation would have to be done. Maybe it'd have to be at the party level for candidates.

Whatever, I'm okay with it becoming a rule. A few things to keep in mind are:

1) Prescribed drugs

2) Test error rates

3) Ongoing testing after the election, which then becomes a government issue, not just party

4) List of substances to be screened for, origination of list and content of list

5) Punishments for test refusal or tricking

6) Objective monitoring of testing processes

7) And best for last, why do it in the first place? This goes back to Trump and his ongoing rants about rigged elections, media, systems, and I suppose life in general. It's just him against the world, eh?

Because of his ongoing odd behavior, I highly recommend that Trump be considered insane big league. While he seems harmless (unless he wins), his minions are making noises about violent revolution and assassination.

Among those who treat drug addiction, this is known as enabling. Among law enforcement, it's inciting. Constitutionally, it's treason.

I'm pretty sure the FBI, SS and local authorities are paying attention. Maybe even the CIA with all the hacking going on and uncertainty about Trump's international connections.

The three domestic terrorists who were recently nabbed for conspiracy against Muslim citizens should be opening eyes among the Trump supporters who crave violent revolution. But then they could be far beyond reason, so unreachable that way.

A similar thing happened with President Obama's election. It's not like this is new stuff for law enforcement, which is good in that we get to read about foiled schemes rather than mourn about lost lives and liberties.

It'd be interesting to find out what force is stronger in the country, racism or misogyny, as measured by threat levels during and after the elections. Maybe they are actually the same force, call it hatred.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Curmudgeon
post Oct 16 2016, 09:53 PM
Post #11


********
I am an unpaid protester!

Sponsor
August 1, 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 1,193
Member No.: 729
Joined: May-14-03

From: Michigan
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



Business Insider Headline: Hillary Clinton should accept Donald Trump's drug-test challenge
Okay Donald, since you suggested it...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Hobbes
post Oct 16 2016, 10:51 PM
Post #12


Group Icon

**********
No More Mr. Nice Guy!

Group: Committee Members
Posts: 5,312
Member No.: 1,155
Joined: September-8-03

From: Dallas, TX
Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



Honestly don't know where this came from. With all the issues I might have with Hillary...Hillary Clinton Druggie never even entered my mind.

Is he thinking some sort of stimulant. Like...an energy drink? this must be an extension of the 'she is worn out' meme. But a big leap from that to drug user.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
akaCG
post Oct 16 2016, 11:59 PM
Post #13


*********
Advanced Senior Contributor

Sponsor
August 2012

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 4,846
Member No.: 10,787
Joined: November-25-09

Gender: Male
Politics: Conservative
Party affiliation: Independent



QUOTE(Hobbes @ Oct 16 2016, 06:51 PM) *
Honestly don't know where this came from. ...
...

Said meme's "seed", 'far as I can tell, was "planted" into the "national discourse" via Howard Dean's "Notice Trump sniffing all the time. Coke user?" Tweet at 10:02 pm Eastern/7:02 Pacific on September 26 (i.e. minimally more than 60 minutes into the very 1st of this electoral season's 3 Presidential debates).

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
AuthorMusician
post Oct 17 2016, 09:27 AM
Post #14


**********
Glasses and journalism work for me.

Sponsor
November 2003

Group: Sponsors
Posts: 6,353
Member No.: 297
Joined: December-1-02

From: Blueberry Hill
Gender: Male
Politics: Liberal
Party affiliation: Democrat



QUOTE(akaCG @ Oct 16 2016, 07:59 PM) *
QUOTE(Hobbes @ Oct 16 2016, 06:51 PM) *
Honestly don't know where this came from. ...
...

Said meme's "seed", 'far as I can tell, was "planted" into the "national discourse" via Howard Dean's "Notice Trump sniffing all the time. Coke user?" Tweet at 10:02 pm Eastern/7:02 Pacific on September 26 (i.e. minimally more than 60 minutes into the very 1st of this electoral season's 3 Presidential debates).

Heh, everything's a meme now.

I noticed the sniffling within the first half hour, maybe the first ten minutes, of the first debate and thought that it was probably blow. That's not a meme but identifying a common result of snorting drugs, something I encountered during the summer of 1974 and that became a common joke during the 1980s in stand-up acts and movies.

The reason I remember the initial contact with a sniffing jerk who couldn't keep his obnoxious trap shut is that it was the same late summer that RMN resigned -- caught that in a little bar out of Santa Fe -- and while meeting up with a leggy beauty in Albuquerque. The snorting fool turned me off to the idea of speed entirely. Well, that and its effect of making me feel way too invincible while riding my chopper with said leggy beauty on back, heading to the mountains for a little R&R, which is an entirely different story.

I'm pretty sure Trump is trying to deflect this observation by accusing Clinton of using some kind of amphetamine, which has always been available via prescription, starting with white-cross diet pills in the 1960s. Amphetamines were used extensively in Vietnam, also barbiturates, and of course there was Mama-san and her fat, cheap bags of pot.

Anyway, if a meme is out and about regarding drugs, their use and abuse and what the telltale signs are, it's far older than Trump's sniffing a lot during a nationally watched debate.

What is it called when a meme becomes common knowledge? I kinda think it's called common knowledge.

What's so funny about Trump probably snorting cocaine, the drug preferred by yuppie toads of the 1980s? It's Trump and a presidential debate, not an SNL bit. No comedic exaggeration required.

The funny faded quickly too, having been based on really old jokes and getting upstaged by the bragging about sexually abusive behavior. That's funny because Republican. Oh how far they've gone down that rat hole. I almost feel sorry for Pence, but then he's an idiot if he didn't see it coming.

I do feel sorry for serious conservatives who find themselves without a party. Something should be done about that. Maybe stop blaming liberals for their problems? Stop projecting and evading? Grow a pair and get to work? Locate the lost spine? Abandon nostalgic illusions of the past and maybe take a look around at what's actually going on rather than trying to destroy the country? Give the old heave-ho to authoritarianism? Stop admiring dictators? Stop fearing minorities?

Whatever, they need to do something. Nobody can do it for them.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

Reply to this topicStart new topic
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

  
Go to the top of the page - Simple Version Time is now: July 22nd, 2018 - 08:20 PM
©2002-2010 America's Debate, Inc.  All rights reserved.