Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: What is Drug Czar John Walters afraid of?
America's Debate > Archive > Policy Debate Archive > [A] Domestic Policy
Google
mopar
From MPP.org http://www.mpp.org/states/site/quicknews.cgi?key=5098
QUOTE
On September 10, White House Drug Czar John Walters called for "a national debate" about marijuana policy. The Marijuana Policy Project hopes he meant it.


Soon after Mr. Walters called for this debate, Mr. Robert Kampia, Executive Director Marijuana Policy Project, graciously accepted his offer http://www.mpp.org/pdf/debate_invite.pdf This was a month ago (Sept. 17th) and as far as I know Mr. Walters has still not responded.

My question is actually two part:

As the title says: What is Drug Czar John Walters afraid of?

And: Should there be a national debate about the legalization of marijuana or perhaps even a national vote?
Google
CruisingRam
Drug Czars are really a propaganda head, not really any other function, as they don't really ever delve into actually helping the country wean itself from drugs. There is an enormous amount of money going to alot of poeple to keep this drug war going (you have an entire department of the DEA, which would cease to exist without the drug war, private correctional facilities, that make enormous campaign contributions, that would lose billions without this money). So there are hundreds of billions of dollars to be lost, most of them hardcore political sponsors (to be fair, of both parties)

Also, the role of the propagandist is not to debate, but to continue to disperse propaganda, as propaganda cannot survive in a real debate (see John Ashcroft and his attempt to support the patriot act- he only plays to friendly audiences, and publically refuses to "debate the issue, just to educate the public to the reality) - so it would be extremely counter productive to attempt a debate AND continue to be a drug czar LOL
Paladin Elspeth
If the drug czar (interesting term--I never really understood why the U.S. would use a Russian Imperialist term to describe any official American position--do you?)
refuses to debate with Robert Kampia, it is simply because there is no way he can win.

If he argues against a person with cogent arguments in favor of legalizing marijuana, he will look ridiculously hard-nosed to a large segment of Americans, especially in light of the Draconian penalties placed on those who run afoul of the current laws.

If he concedes any points to Mr. Kampia during the course of the debates, he will lose the right-wing, usually religious faction that his boss the President will be counting on for re-election.

Perhaps this issue would be better addressed on a state level. If there are enough states where marijuana is decriminalized, then a nationwide referendum should be called for. But it will be hard to get mainstream candidates to back this one up.
mopar
CruisingRam wrote:
QUOTE
Drug Czars are really a propaganda head, not really any other function, as they don't really ever delve into actually helping the country wean itself from drugs. There is an enormous amount of money going to alot of poeple to keep this drug war going


He is definitely a “propaganda head”, no argument there! He is, however, delving into state initiatives on marijuana law reform.

From http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread17342.shtml
QUOTE
President Bush's drug czar, John Walters, is leading a new systematic nationwide effort to quash citizens' initiatives on pot reform. The trend was established last year when Walters successfully campaigned to defeat initiatives in Nevada, Ohio, and Missouri. Last week, his campaign arrived in Seattle for an afternoon press conference, just six days before the primary election, to challenge Initiative 75--a measure to deprioritize Seattle's pot laws. After this story went to print, I-75 held a comfortable lead at 58.62%. --Eds.


This debate that Mr. Walters spoke of is not about ending the “drug war”, but specifically about marijuana legalization.

Paladin Elspeth wrote:
QUOTE
If the drug czar (interesting term--I never really understood why the U.S. would use a Russian Imperialist term to describe any official American position--do you?)


I’ve heard the term for years, but not really sure who coined the term. I believe that I first heard it from mainstream media, CNN perhaps? I certainly think that the term fits though when one considers what he represents.
Google
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2008 Invision Power Services, Inc.