Drug war fuels violence, Obama officials fail to say

So I’m browsing the news about all these high-level officials going to Mexico to solve the violence problem there…

AP headline: Obama officials say US drug demand fuels violence
Hmmm…Must be a mistake by the headline writer. Surely he meant to say that the drug war fuels violence. It’s probably clarified in the article.

Let’s see what Secretary of State Hillary Clinton had to say.

Clinton said the administration is “looking at everything that can work” to combat the drug cartels.


But when asked by a reporter whether that included considering decriminalizing narcotics in the United States, she replied with a single word: “No.”

Well, of course. And then I’m sure she went on to say…

“No. Decriminalization is not a proper solution, because it leaves the cartels in charge. The only real solution is full legalization and regulation, so we can re-claim the controls from the criminal element.”

But apparently, if she did say that, if failed to get reported.

Instead we got…

A cast of senior U.S. security officials pledged long-term support for Mexico’s drug war while acknowledging Tuesday that an insatiable U.S. appetite for illegal narcotics, coupled with a flow of U.S. arms into Mexico, is at the core of the problem.

And the solution?

Clinton said the administration would make public very shortly a new drug policy and that it would include strategies for reducing drug demand.

Ah, a new policy. Well, maybe not a new policy. It’ll still be prohibition. But maybe with some lipstick.

Could she be referring to the new National Drug Control Strategy, which was supposed to be unveiled today by Vice President Biden and Drug Czar Kerlikowske? They were sending out press advisories about it yesterday.

WASHINGTON – Tomorrow, Tuesday, March 23, at 2:00 PM ET, Vice President Biden and Drug Control Director Gil Kerlikowske, along with several Cabinet Secretaries, will lay out the Administration’s inaugural National Drug Control Strategy, which establishes five-year goals for reducing drug use and its consequences through a balanced policy of prevention, treatment, and international cooperation. This event will take place in the Roosevelt Room. The Vice President and Director Kerlikowske will deliver remarks. These remarks will be pooled press.

And yet, that oddly got changed to: **THIS EVENT HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO A LATER DATE.

Don’t know why. Could it be that they didn’t have it quite together? Or could it be the lipstick was showing?


(Yes, of course, it was because the health care bill is a big f**king deal. Kerlikowske is actually in Mexico with Clinton.)

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

16 Responses to Drug war fuels violence, Obama officials fail to say

  1. Just me says:

    Would be nice to hear them come out and say they see the only solution is legalization but, Im sitting here watching the news. Quad Cities of Iowa/Illinois are busting convienience stores for drug paraphenalia, A felony for selling pipes and now….blunt wrap?. Well that looks like a crack down to me. As I said yesterday in another thread here Pete….

    “In the current situation of prohibition, which enriches organized crime, we are powerless to reduce the availability of drugs and meaningfully reduce violence,” said Dr. Wood.

    What does he mean we are powerless. We here in the US have a solution we are well on our way to emplimenting…arrest everyone! Gezz … the gall of these reform people!

    Hummm…. maybe I shouldnt have been sarcastic….it maybe true…

    Guess we’ll see………

  2. strayan says:

    Many countries have been very successful at curbing tobacco use because of three things:

    1. Excise tax
    2. Pack warnings (which effectively bombard the user with health warnings dozens of times of day)
    3. Age limits

    More people have quit smoking and avoided the habit altogether because of these things than for any other reason.

    As long as drugs are prohibited packing warnings are an impossibility, excise tax a dream and as you all know who ever heard of a drug dealer checking ID?

    They seem to have absolutely no interest in reducing drug demand.

  3. denmark says:

    Heard some of this on public radio today while driving home, it turned my stomach. Only those who are willing to recognize the utter failure of the drug war could possibly gain my respect, not the bozo’s spouting their continuous lies.

    strayan: one chap from the U.K. had this to say about the pack warning labels that we’ll soon be seeing: We’ve had those here in the UK for quite some time now and smokers take no notice, smokers by special cigarette pack holders to hide them.

    There is no trick these anti-smoking bastards will not try with these pics. Dieing babies, impotency, drug users needles, massive neck tumors etc.

    The UK are the worse offenders for denormalising smokers and get away with anything. Now they want to double or even triple the tax on tobacco products, (75% of a pack of cigarettes already goes to the treasury.)

  4. Steffanie says:


  5. strayan says:

    denmark: if pack warnings are ineffective, why has the tobacco industry gone to such lengths to avoid, delay and dilute them?

    And if you don’t believe me, feel free to educate yourself: http://hwmaint.tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/12/suppl_3/iii13

    My home country (Australia) is on their way to introducing plain packs that all look the same, except for the garish health warnings (which means they’d look like prescription drug packs). I fully support this experiment.

    The only way to curb drug consumption is to legalise them. This enables you to slap a tax on them, a warning label and mandatory ID checks.

  6. Cannabis says:

    I think Pete’s right, the timing of the release was supposed to coincide with the talks in Mexico. Health care reform is a big fucking deal and the latest national drug control strategy report is not. Oh to be a fly on the wall for the decision to cancel the release.

  7. claygooding says:

    I think their strategy will be to ask for bigger budgets,more jails and longer sentences for dealers and cultivators. I don’t know what their strategy for the initiative vote in Ca is for Nov but I’ll be surprised if they don’t start rattling their swords pretty soon about that. I suppose that by a pooled press they mean that their won’t be a chance of anyone asking them any of the questions that really need to be asked.
    I just hope that every sitting legislator is job hunting after the November elections or at least most of them.
    I wonder how long before they start arresting advocates for drug reform?
    Since Bush and Cheney built all those internment camps and the money is already spent,they probably won’t want to waste it.
    I look for threats of federal funding cuts to Ca and any other state that tries to let the people decide.
    The pharmaceutical companies really do have a grip on our governments nutsack,don’t they.

  8. kaptinemo says:

    “I look for threats of federal funding cuts to CA and any other state that tries to let the people decide.”

    Clay, as a matter of fact, the Feds were able to get away with that only for so long as the Feds themselves appeared to be solvent. But Big Daddy Fed ain’t so flush, any more…

    The fact is the Feds are just as broke as anyone else. And the State legislatures know this. Which is partly why the reform movement has been able to make some headway recently. And will continue to do so, as we have the potential tax revenue card from re-legalized cannabis in our hands, whereas the Feds have nothing to offer but more deficits.

  9. Pete says:

    They’ve already put forth the budget, so this document is essentially supposed to be the vision statement for their drug control policy.

    Problem is, they don’t have any vision. I expect to hear a lot of talk about demand reduction, and that’ll probably mostly be promoting treatment. The Drug Czar is visiting a substance abuse agency in Phoenix today. Whether that was planned before or after the postponement of the press conference, it still is an indication of the thrust of the National Drug Control Strategy.

    I’m really curious to see what the document says, if anything, about drugged driving, given my current petition for Information Quality correction.

  10. ezrydn says:

    I would expect that every time Calderon hears “demand reduction,” he cringes. He already knows what needs to be done and he’s not hearing it from his northern partners. I’d like to know what’s being said in these current meetings. Guess I’ll hear about it, soon enough.

    One thing I’ve noticed is that the Prohibs are very good at pointing fingers. That is, unless they’re standing in front of a mirror.

    As a group, we should consider taking a stand to change the dialogue from “drug war/drug killings” to “Prohibition War/Prohibition Killings.” Maybe more people would make the “connect.”

  11. kaptinemo says:

    Presidente’Calderon is finding out what it means to be the ‘straight man’ in a particularly nasty bad joke. Like the ordinary person in a Monty Python skit being subjected to all sorts of outrageous behavior and in the end becoming unhinged from it.

    Everyone knows the solution. No one in power will publicly say it. And thus the blood-dripping, corpse-generating farce continues…

  12. Buc says:

    Mr. Guither, you are so solid at taking context clues and showing us, the readers, what they really mean.

    Haha, honestly, if you attempted to interpret what Hillary Clinton said as pro-drug policy reform, it would be no more spin than what the drug czar’s website posts on a daily basis.

    That would piss ’em off. Use their tactics of deliberate misrepresentation against them, haha.

  13. ezrydn says:


    That’s the nice thing about being a part of the Reform Movement. There’s no need to drag ourselves down to their level of lies and miscommunications. That’s strictly their playground. And when they play their game, we’re right there to take on the targets they’ve presented us with, using factual bullets.

    You only need spin when you’re without truth.

  14. truthtechnician says:

    They don’t have to have a vision. They don’t have to appease us. The reform movement is nothing to them. The press is in their lap, both parties are in their lap. Lipstick will work wonders.

    You don’t need spin? Spin has been far more successful than truth, so far.

  15. aussidawg says:

    This is so (excuse the language but I am extremely angry) fucking obvious, stoppin the drug war will without a doubt stop the cartels. I know I am repeating an old talking point, but what did Prohibition reap? Al Caones, Lucky Lucciano, Bugs Moran, etal.

    I have an elderly friend who very recently broke her pelvis in a fall. Her doctor prescribed Motrin and Tylenol. He wouldn’t prescribe an opite pain killer because he feared prosecution. The DEA is now on a witch hunt going after pain clinics for providing compassionate care to their patients.

    This fucking country is insane. The teabaggers (aka sack danglers) can call a Georgia congressman a “nigger” spit on homosexuals, the DEA can harrass pain physicians trained in the field of pain management, break into people’s homes with “a wrong address” and kill the family pets while holding the entire family hostage, yet protesters at the elite G-20 get sound cannons and thousand of SWAT pigs.

    Face it, we have become a fascist nation, and the “Change we can believe in ” president is the head of the hydra.

    How does one fight this insanity? The American people are mezmerized with American Idol and Dancing with the Stars while the nation sinks. How can one fight apathy?

    I’m sorry for the rant. I just see the end of what *COULD* have been an exemplary nation. The greed pigs have won it would appear.

    On a final note, I would like to refer anyone who might be interested (probably everyone on this site) to read the following article by Joe Bageant Cantina Tolteca Pissing away them Kokopelli Blues. An excellent article on the effect of the American War on Drugs and Mexico.

  16. aussidawg says:

    Sorry, I tried to link the article by Joe Bageant. The link is as follows http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article25079.htm.

Comments are closed.