Check out C-Span at 9:15 am Eastern on Saturday, October 9
Allen St. Pierre of NORML vs. former DEA head Asa Hutchinson
Iâ€™ve been invited back to C-Span to debate and discuss the topics of cannabis legalization, and specifically Californiaâ€™s upcoming vote on Prop. 19, a measure that if approved by the voters will effectively
legalize cannabis in Americaâ€™s most important state politically and
Former Drug Enforcement Administration chief and Republican congressman from Arkansas Asa Hutchinson has stepped up to argue in favor of the status quo and continuing into a ninth decade of Cannabis Prohibition.
The live interview is scheduled to broadcast Saturday morning (10/9/10) on C-Span TV, 9:15am â€“ 10:00am (easternâ€¦sorry west coasters!). Like most C-Span shows, the public is invited to ask questions or make short
To watch online, go to: http://www.c-span.org/Watch/C-SPAN.aspx
This C-Span interview is likely the result of the Wall Street Journal
publishing an unprecedented jointly signed letter earlier this week by
every previous DEA administrator predictably calling for the Obama
administration to actively oppose politically viable cannabis legalization
voter initiatives in places like California (just the way they did).
Is the body politic (and the mainstream media that has so aptly aided and
abetted these technocrats’ blatant disregard for democracy, science,
compassion and common sense) really, really nervous about the cataclysmic blow that California voters are about to level on a self-evidently failed federal government public policyâ€”another â€˜warâ€™ lost by government?
What do you think?
See you on the TV and kind regards,
-Allen St. Pierre
You bet they are nervous about losing the Status Quo , its a complete game changer…and not in their favor. At this point they will do anything they can to stop that.
I see this as a revolution they have avoided since the 60’s….getting the man out of OUR lives.
Bringing the topic to the MSM is but the first of many victories. Truth and justice cannot be usurped in this day of instant worldwide communication.
I can still get no answers about how much of the ONDCP
budget is used on marijuana prohibition from the GAO,they don’t even answer inquiries any more.
But if you were going to have at least half of your budget cut because your justification for it has become legal,you would probably be jumping too.
And you know the silent supporters of prohibition are pulling their hair out,the big industries that will be hurt by hemp not being prohibited any longer. They have spent millions of dollars keeping hemp off of the playing field and are secure as long as any attempt to legalize hemp is conducted in a legislature because they
can buy the support necessary to have the bills ignored or passed over but the public is a different ball game.
They can’t buy us off.
Allen didn’t get as much screen time as I would have hoped, but he came across well. Asa seemed like a huckster who did not really believe in what he was selling, but kept smiling and delivering his lines anyway.
Great debate but I wish they would have let Allen rebut Hutchinson’s answers to callers.
Watched this from the UK… wow.. Asa got his air-times worth didn’t he. He kept coming back to one point ‘use will increase’… would have liked St.Pierre at least once to come back to this with references to Portugal or real Dutch data on lower per captia usage than the States with de-facto legalisation/decrim… pretty disappointing ‘debate’. Allen was good but definitely needed more air-time.
We have this on tomorrow on the BBC http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p00bgsmy . Hopefully be more thought provoking and balanced
Does anybody know where I can see this debate? I missed it and can’t find a cached copy. Seven in the AM is O-dark-thirty here, left coast time. And I can’t check the rant in my sleep (I’m working on that).
Pierre presented staunch evidence of the failure of marijuana prohibition and Asa never denied the failure
but just went into the protect the children mode,then it was Asa’s show with questions from the viewers,all proponents of legalization,Asa never really answered any of the questions but went into prohibition land where the government is supreme and all must bow down to the law.
If they had allowed Pierre to reply to Asa’s comments to the questions it would have made it a balanced debate but it came off as the Asa-DEA show.
Does anybody know where I can see this debate?
In an attempt to ask pointed questions of the former DEA administrator callers inadvertently allowed him to structure the “debate”. I yelled at the TV, “ask St Pierre the questions” you idiots “ask St Pierre the questions”. I couldn’t get through. Any on else try?
Darkcycle, C-span has has it in their Video Library on-line.
That’s a really good point, David. The call-in show format like that is the hardest thing possible for the caller, because the recipient of the call has control and can just divert the discussion over to their talking points. It’s not like a debate format.
If I was on a show like that, I could take any question in that format and turn it into whatever I wanted it to be. You’re right, the best way is to ask your question to the person with whom you agree.
Example: A question for Mr. St. Pierre: When Mr. Hutchinson said that ____, wasn’t he ignoring the fact that ____?
Rough quote: “History has shown that if you legalize it use will go up”
What history is Mr. Hutchinson is talking about? There is *one* instance in American history where a substance (alcohol) was prohibited and later re-legalized. While alcohol use did go up as soon Prohibition was repealed (something easily labeled as “celebration use”), it quickly leveled off to pre-Prohibition levels. As for the Netherlands and cannabis, which is perhaps what Mr. Hutchinson is referring to (though that country has not actually “legalized” cannabis), after open sells to adults began to be tolerated use went down and use in Holland continues to be considerably lower compared to U.S.
So much for “History has shown”.
Also, if you wish to the watch the “debate” it’s on C-SPAN’s website.
Oh, and I loved that guy who called himself a former smuggler.