• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Last 3 Presidents could have been busted for Pot possession

A

Anonymous

Guest
Sen. Paul: Obama, Bush ‘lucky’ they weren’t arrested for smoking pot as kids

By Jordy Yager - 03/24/13 10:23 AM ET

Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Sunday that President Obama and former President George W. Bush “got lucky” by not being arrested for smoking marijuana as young adults.

Arguing against mandatory minimum sentencing for pot use, Paul said that a marijuana-related arrest for either Obama or Bush could have ruined their lives.

“Look, the last two presidents could conceivably have been put in jail for their drug use,” said Paul on “Fox News Sunday.”

“Look what would have happened. It would have ruined their lives. They got lucky. But a lot of poor kids, particularly in the inner city, don’t get lucky. They don’t have good attorneys. They go to jail for these things. And I think it’s a big mistake.”


Paul said he was not in favor of using marijuana, because it makes people less productive. But he said he doesn’t support punishing people who use the drug with jail time.

“I don’t want to encourage people to do it. I think even marijuana is a bad thing to do,” said Paul. “I think it takes away your incentive to work and show up and do the things you should be doing. I don’t think it’s a good idea. I don’t want to promote that.

“But I also don’t want to put people in jail who make a mistake. There are a lot of young people who do this and then later on, in their 20’s, they grow up, they get married, and they quit doing things like this. I don’t want to put them in jail for the rest of their lives.”

Earlier this week Paul introduced a bill with Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) that would relax the mandatory minimum sentences handed out to marijuana offenders who do not pose a violent threat to the public. The bill has gained the support of some influential conservatives, including anti-tax activist Grover Norquist.

Soon after announcing his bid for the presidency, Obama admitted to reporters in 2006 to smoking marijuana as a teenager. And one year before that, a series of secretly recorded conversations between Bush and a former adviser to his father documented the former Texas governor admitting to trying marijuana as a younger man.

President Clinton has said he did not inhale when presented with marijuana in his younger days.


Read more: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/290037-sen-paul-obama-bush-lucky-they-werent-arrested-for-smoking-pot-as-kids#ixzz2OTayHRS5
Follow us: @thehill on Twitter | TheHill on Facebook

Don't matter if you inhaled or not Bill- you were in possession-- and back them days with all 3 Presidents-- in many states possession of even the smallest amount was a felony....

I think we should be listening more to the Libertarians and folks like their last candidate Gary Johnson- who as a former Governor of a border state saw that the War on Drugs declared back in the 70's- has been totally lost...

Despite our best efforts at enforcement, education and interdiction, people continue to use and abuse illegal drugs.



The parallels between drug policy today and Prohibition in the 1920’s are obvious, as are the lessons our nation learned. Prohibition was repealed because it made matters worse. Today, no one is trying to sell our kids bathtub gin in the schoolyard and micro-breweries aren’t protecting their turf with machine guns. It’s time to apply that thinking to marijuana. By making it a legal, regulated product, availability can be restricted, under-age use curtailed, enforcement/court/incarceration costs reduced, and the profit removed from a massive underground and criminal economy.



By managing marijuana like alcohol and tobacco – regulating, taxing and enforcing its lawful use – America will be better off. The billions saved on marijuana interdiction, along with the billions captured as legal revenue, can be redirected against the individuals committing real crimes against society.
---------
When polled, high school kids say marijuana is easier to get than alcohol. Is this perhaps because they buy from black market dealers who do not ask for ID?

Legalization of marijuana would instantly and dramatically improve conditions on our southern border. Marijuana is Mexico's #1 illegal export; legalizing it would result in dramatically reducing the power and wealth of the drug lords, and instantly helping to restore stability in a nation whose stability and sustainability is truly vital to our economic and national security interests. If we truly wish to reduce border violence, take the profit out of it.

BEFORE WE CAN GET SERIOUS ABOUT REDUCING the harms associated with drugs, we have to accept that there will never be a drug-free society.

To create a drug-free society, we'd have to build a police apparatus so intrusive that all Americans would have to be under surveillance 24 hours a day... presumably for their own good. Would citizens of the "land of the free" ever stand for that?
Abuse of hard drugs is a health problem that should be dealt with by health experts, not a problem that should be clogging up our courts, jails, and prisons with addicts. Instead of continuing to arrest and incarcerate drug users, we should seriously consider the examples of countries such as Portugal and the Netherlands, and we should ultimately choose to adopt policies which aim to reduce death, disease, violence, and crime associated with dangerous drugs.
Honest, effective education will be key to succeeding with this transition. America has cut teen cigarette use in half, not by criminalizing possession and use, but through a combination of honest education and sensible regulation.
We can never totally eliminate drug addiction and drug abuse. We can, however, minimize these harms and reduce the negative effects they have on society by making sure drug abusers are able to access effective treatment options (jail is not an effective treatment option).

https://www.garyjohnson2012.com/issues/drug-policy-reform
 

Mike

Well-known member
First of all, there was never a "War On Drugs" declared back in the 1970's.

The "War" was on "Drug Abuse & Prevention".
The Comprehensive Drug Abuse Prevention and Control Act of 1970

The "War On Drugs" is a made-up phony name by proponents to make the activity of any control attempt seem sinister.

Nixon had a hand in enacting this mostly because of the many Vietnam era soldiers coming home with a Heroin addiction. Plus smoking pot had become more recreational by the anarchists and peaceniks in the "Peace & Love" crowd.

Legalization of pot has been tried in several states. I lived in one. But it soon became a problem because the users were getting younger and younger. De-criminalization has been tried also.

Nobody knows what the absolute answer is. My guess would be to make anything legal in California and make all drug users move there. It's already a cesspool.

It's the kids I worry about.....................
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Mike said:
First of all, there was never a "War On Drugs" declared back in the 1970's.
The "War" was on "Drug Abuse & Prevention".


The "War On Drugs" is a made-up phony name by proponents to make the activity of any control attempt seem sinister.


Whatever semantics games you want to play-- the country and the world know it as the way the Presidents portrayed it to them- the "War on Drugs"....
In 1971 President Richard Nixon declared war on drugs. He proclaimed, “America’s public enemy number one in the United States is drug abuse. In order to fight and defeat this enemy, it is necessary to wage a new, all-out offensive.”

Shortly after Ronald Reagan became President in 1981 he delivered a speech on the topic. Reagan announced, “We’re taking down the surrender flag that has flown over so many drug efforts; we’re running up a battle flag."
 

Mike

Well-known member
OT wrote:
Nixon: “America’s public enemy number one in the United States is drug abuse.


You made my point. Thank you very much.

It's like this Einstein, once you legalize something, you're sending a subliminal message that it's OK & harmless for the masses. Children will be harmed.

Once you legalize pot where do you stop? Meth? Crack? Heroin?

They cannot even control the illicit use of prescription drugs, much less illegal contraband.

There has to be a big turnaround in the way of thinking & parenting here and legalizing drugs doesn't send a message to kids that it's wrong. Just the opposite...............................
 

gmacbeef

Well-known member
And don't forget O.T., your boy Oblamea snorted some COKE ( & who knows what else) too.......that's a lot worse than pot.

From the looks of the job he's doing running the country, many might wonder what Drugs he's still on NOW . :shock:
 

Whitewing

Well-known member
gmacbeef said:
And don't forget O.T., your boy Oblamea snorted some COKE ( & who knows what else) too.......that's a lot worse than pot.

From the looks of the job he's doing running the country, many might wonder what Drugs he's still on NOW . :shock:

Rest assured, the King is high on Obama.
 

Tam

Well-known member
If we truly wish to reduce border violence, take the profit out of it.

BEFORE WE CAN GET SERIOUS ABOUT REDUCING the harms associated with drugs, we have to accept that there will never be a drug-free society.

If the libs get their way, in about five years we will be saying

If we truly wish to reduce border violence, take the profit out of it.

BEFORE WE CAN GET SERIOUS ABOUT REDUCING the harms associated with guns, we have to accept that there will never be a gun-free society.

They want to make one legal to take the profit out of it but they are looking to make the other illegal so there will be more profits in them. MAKES NO SENSE. :roll:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer you have made the claim Bush did pot and now you are using Paul's comment to enforce that rumor so would you mind posting a link to a statement from Bush admitting he actually smoked pot? All I can find is articles that say he may have smoked pot or he hinted he did or he almost admitted, leading me to believe the reporters are writing stories ON RUMOR NOT FACT. SO if you have a statement where he said he did I'd love to see it. :wink:

And as far as legalizing pot, WHY BOTHER? The Dems proved illegal use of Pot and Coke as far as the goes, does not stop them from voting for a person. No Obama wasn't caught, BUT he openly ADMITTED in writing in his own book that he did pot, h*ll there are pictures on the Internet of him doing it and they still voted for him. He admitted, that when under pressure in College, he did Coke and there were rumors he even sold it but that did not stop the Dems from voting for him. So after Obama, why does it matter if a person has done something illegal it didn't stop the Dems from electing their admitted pot smoking, Coke sniffing hero DID IT?

BTW Do you think the pressure he was under in college is anywhere close to the pressure he is under in the White House? Ever wonder how is he handling the pressures now that the Dems anointed him their savor and he sees his policies FAILING? :? He also said he did coke when he could afford it in college, how much do you think he can AFFORD now? Gee how much do you think he can get for free from all those hollyweirds and rappers that are always partying at the White House?

The Dems proved you do not have to be faithful to your wife when the voted for Bill Clinton, who if truth be known was only living up to the Kennedy legacy. H*ll Hillary proved POWER is more important than Love and honor. And now with Obama they proved ADMITTEDLY smoking Pot and sniffing Coke is OK too.

Add the fact that they voted for that lying skank Debbie Wasserman Schultz to be the DNC Chairman you have a trifecta.

OPENLY In your face Cheating, Law Breaking and Lying. This Oldtimer is why they are the PARTY OF NO MORALS. And you defend their every move so what does that say about you? :roll:
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Oldtimer you have made the claim Bush did pot and now you are using Paul's comment to enforce that rumor so would you mind posting a link to a statement from Bush admitting he actually smoked pot? All I can find is articles that say he may have smoked pot or he hinted he did or he almost admitted, leading me to believe the reporters are writing stories ON RUMOR NOT FACT. SO if you have a statement where he said he did I'd love to see it. :wink:

Again it was not me making the claim-- it was Rand Paul a Republican Senator....

Ask him where he got his info...
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer you have made the claim Bush did pot and now you are using Paul's comment to enforce that rumor so would you mind posting a link to a statement from Bush admitting he actually smoked pot? All I can find is articles that say he may have smoked pot or he hinted he did or he almost admitted, leading me to believe the reporters are writing stories ON RUMOR NOT FACT. SO if you have a statement where he said he did I'd love to see it. :wink:

Again it was not me making the claim-- it was Rand Paul a Republican Senator....

Ask him where he got his info...

Nice try Oldtimer but you have made this same claim I don't know how many times right here on Ranchers and I want YOU to prove he actually did it.

As for Rand Paul, he could have fallen for the old if you hear it enough it must be true crap. There seems to be alot of that going around Oldtimer, I just want to see some proof from you that what you have been pushing for years IS TRUE.

So PUT UP OR SHUT UP about Bush's alleged drug use.
 
A

Anonymous

Guest
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer you have made the claim Bush did pot and now you are using Paul's comment to enforce that rumor so would you mind posting a link to a statement from Bush admitting he actually smoked pot? All I can find is articles that say he may have smoked pot or he hinted he did or he almost admitted, leading me to believe the reporters are writing stories ON RUMOR NOT FACT. SO if you have a statement where he said he did I'd love to see it. :wink:

Again it was not me making the claim-- it was Rand Paul a Republican Senator....

Ask him where he got his info...

Nice try Oldtimer but you have made this same claim I don't know how many times right here on Ranchers and I want YOU to prove he actually did it.

As for Rand Paul, he could have fallen for the old if you hear it enough it must be true crap. There seems to be alot of that going around Oldtimer, I just want to see some proof from you that what you have been pushing for years IS TRUE.

So PUT UP OR SHUT UP about Bush's alleged drug use.


Google it- Kola can use every dime her shares go up !!! :wink:

You wouldn't believe it if it was the Pope that swore on the Bible he heard it anyway!! :roll:
 

Tam

Well-known member
Oldtimer said:
Tam said:
Oldtimer said:
Again it was not me making the claim-- it was Rand Paul a Republican Senator....

Ask him where he got his info...

Nice try Oldtimer but you have made this same claim I don't know how many times right here on Ranchers and I want YOU to prove he actually did it.

As for Rand Paul, he could have fallen for the old if you hear it enough it must be true crap. There seems to be alot of that going around Oldtimer, I just want to see some proof from you that what you have been pushing for years IS TRUE.

So PUT UP OR SHUT UP about Bush's alleged drug use.


Google it- Kola can use every dime her shares go up !!! :wink:

You wouldn't believe it if it was the Pope that swore on the Bible he heard it anyway!! :roll:

Gee Oldtimer are you drinking again tonight and missed the fact I said

All I can find is articles that say he may have smoked pot or he hinted he did or he almost admitted, leading me to believe the reporters are writing stories ON RUMOR NOT FACT.

And since you are SO concerned with Kola's finances why don't you google it. Stop dodging and provide some proof of YOUR CLAIMS or we are going to have to think you are making crap up AGAIN :wink: .

BTW if the Pope said it I would believe him BUT YOU ARE NOT THE POPE OLDTIMER. :wink:
 

Steve

Well-known member
The parallels between drug policy today and Prohibition in the 1920’s are obvious, as are the lessons our nation learned. Prohibition was repealed because it made matters worse. Today, no one is trying to sell our kids bathtub gin in the schoolyard and micro-breweries aren’t protecting their turf with machine guns. It’s time to apply that thinking to marijuana. By making it a legal, regulated product, availability can be restricted, under-age use curtailed, enforcement/court/incarceration costs reduced, and the profit removed from a massive underground and criminal economy.

legalisation may solve some of the problems.. and create federal revenue.. and a few jobs.. but it will NOT solve the drug abuse problem..

in fact for some time it will make it worse..

Figure1_2010.gif


if you look at the graph it is easy to see we still have not dropped below the prohibition consumption rates..

Figure6_2010.gif


looking at historical data,.. shows that until the late seventies until it dropped off signifcantly in the US

about 35 years.. in the mean time.. our streets will be less safe, and more will ruin thier lives..

while I agree on that one issue with Johnson and Paul..it is not without dire consequnces..
 

Tam

Well-known member
Since we know Oldtimer will not I did and here is what I found.

Since Bush has never acknowledged using drugs, the international media played up the marijuana angle.

The BBC emphasized Bush's discretion in addressing the subject, saying "Bush hints he tried marijuana." So did Aljazeera: "Tapes hint Bush smoked marijuana." Swissinfo, a news site in Geneva, asked "Did Bush smoke pot?"

In Australia, the Sydney Morning Herald focused on Bush's reasoning for not talking about the issue publicly. Bush worried young people would copy his cannabis use, the paper said.

From South America to the Middle East to Asia, other news sites concluded that Bush's statements amounted to a confession.

"Bush confessed to having smoked marijuana in his youth," declared Las Ultimas Noticias (in Spanish), a Chilean tabloid. "Bush's Marijuana Confession on Television," said Zaman, a leading Turkish daily. "Bush admits using marijuana," said Rediff, a news portal in India. In Tokyo, Japan Today said, "Secret tapes indicate Bush used drugs as youth."

A few foreign sites offered more light-hearted headlines. "Bush's own 'smoking gun'," said the South Africa broadcast outlet, News24. The Economic Times of India sounded less than shocked: "Oh boy! George may have puffed on marijuana" was their headline.

In contrast, most of the traditional leaders of American journalism -- the New York Times, The Washington Post, the Los Angeles Times and the TV networks -- made no mention of drugs in their headlines, although all reported the substance of what Bush said on the tapes.

The Times' story carried the headline "In Secretly Taped Conversations, Glimpses of the Future President" and mentioned marijuana in the third paragraph. The Post followed up the next day with "Secret Tapes Not Meant to Harm, Writer Says." Bush's drug comments were mentioned in the fifth paragraph of The Post story. Among national U.S. news outlets, only ABCNews.com used the M-word in a headline declaring, "New Tapes Say Bush May Have Smoked Marijuana."

Other national news outlets were more indirect. The Los Angeles Times said "Secret Tapes Show Bush's Concern Over Past." National Public Radio reported, "Phone Tapes Suggest Bush's Unlawful Past." For these sites and many others, the news was not "pot" but the "past," a word choice that signaled that the accompanying news story was not really new.

The one medium where the drug angle was emphasized was local TV news, long regarded as the most sensationalist sector of American journalism. Stations from Los Angeles ("Tape Released of Bush's Wild Party Days") to New Orleans to Johnstown, Penn., highlighted Bush's apparent drug use.

What explains the difference between the elite American media and the rest of the world?

Admission of drug use by a national leader has made front-page news before. When Bill Clinton admitted in the 1992 presidential campaign to smoking marijuana both the Times ("Clinton Admits Experiment With Marijuana in 1960's") and The Post ("Clinton Admits '60s Marijuana Use") ran the story on page one. But that was during the heat of a presidential primary campaign when such revelations can be more consequential. It could be argued that the Wead tapes, coming to light after Bush's reelection, are unlikely to alter the political equation in Washington.

The Bush administration and its supporters have never shied from criticizing news outlets like The Post and the Times for a perceived liberal bias. On tape, Bush complained about a media "campaign" against him. "It's unbelievable... they just float sewer out there," he's quoted as saying.

If the big-name newspapers had played up the drug angle it's reasonable to assume that Republicans and conservatives on talk radio would renew such accusations. They might say liberal editors were dredging up an old story from a disloyal friend to thwart the agenda of a popular conservative president.

Foreign editors (and local TV) have no such worries. They have a simpler view: George Bush using illegal drugs is worth a headline.

Gee GW Bush has never admitted doing drugs even after Bill Clinton had. And in most of the articles they say HE HINTS, HE MAY HAVE and they even come out and ask DID GW SMOKE POT? It is only those looking for a more sensational headlines that actually come out and say he did. But then if we are to believe those with sensational headlines then Hillary thinks the OBAMA's ARE BACK STABBERS, MICHELLE IS DIVORCING BARAK and my favorite BARAK KILLED HIS GAY LOVER SO HE WOULDN'T SPILL THE BEANS ON HIS COCAINE USE.

If everything you read in the media is true then why isn't Barak in prison for murder Oldtimer? Are the cops out looking for some guy with the name Barry still? :wink:
 

loomixguy

Well-known member
Does OD think that no Libertarian ever used the herb, or took even harder drugs?

I bet his man crush #2 Gary Johnson has some skeletons in his closet.....
 

gmacbeef

Well-known member
loomixguy said:
Does OD think that no Libertarian ever used the herb, or took even harder drugs?

I bet his man crush #2 Gary Johnson has some skeletons in his closet.....

There's no doubt that Johnson fried his brain on something .
 

djinwa

Well-known member
Mike said:
OT wrote:
Nixon: “America’s public enemy number one in the United States is drug abuse.


You made my point. Thank you very much.

It's like this Einstein, once you legalize something, you're sending a subliminal message that it's OK & harmless for the masses. Children will be harmed.

Once you legalize pot where do you stop? Meth? Crack? Heroin?

They cannot even control the illicit use of prescription drugs, much less illegal contraband.

There has to be a big turnaround in the way of thinking & parenting here and legalizing drugs doesn't send a message to kids that it's wrong. Just the opposite...............................

You can divide the population into two groups - those who want governernment solutions to all our problems, and those that don't. It used to be that conservatives were for personal responsibility and for parents educating and disciplining their kids. Now so-called conservatives want the government to do it for them. There is little difference between the core philosophy of most liberals and conservatives - they each want government to force the other guy to do what they want.

If you need the law to keep your kids off drugs and send them a message, why aren't other things illegal?

Why isn't there jailtime for premarital sex? How about overeating? You claim to care about kids - there is now an obesity epidemic among them with higher rates of diabetes, etc, that will end their lives prematurely.

How about lack of sleep, which has been shown to increase accident risk, and reduce immunity?

Based on consistent principles, how to you decide in which areas the government needs to control our lives?

Originally the idea was to use government to protect our rights - meaning to keep others from harming us. Now it is being used more and more to keep us from hurting ourselves, and is becoming a replacement for parenting.

I'd say it is also replacing the values from religion, as we now worship government to keep us safe and protect us - what we used to want from God.
 
Top