What's new

"All Illegal Drugs are Bad" Heroin/Crack no worse than Marijuana for health

budbasket

Member
Michele Leonhart, DEA Chief, Won't Say Whether Crack, Heroin Are Worse For Health Than Marijuana



Michele Leonhart, the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration, ducked a tough line of questioning from Rep. Jared Polis (D-Colo.) on Wednesday, refusing to answer a number of questions about the comparative health impacts of marijuana and other, harder drugs.
Leonhart was testifying before the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security. Polis, a top congressional advocate for marijuana law reform, took the opportunity to grill the DEA administrator on some specifics about marijuana, which has been decriminalized in some parts of his state and legalized for medical purposes in the rest.
“Is crack worse for a person than marijuana?” Polis asked Leonhart.
“I believe all illegal drugs are bad,” Leonhart answered.
Polis continued, asking whether methamphetamines and heroin were worse for a person's health than marijuana.
“Again, all drugs, they're illegal drugs,” Leonhart started, before being cut off by Polis.
“Yes, no, or I don’t know?” Polis said. “If you don’t know, you can look this up. You should know this as the chief administrator for the Drug Enforcement Agency. I’m asking a very straightforward question: Is heroin worse for someone's health than marijuana?”

Leonhart ducked again, repeating, "All illegal drugs are bad."
Since assuming the head position at the DEA, Leonhart has made controlling prescription drug abuse the top priority, a stance she had laid out so aggressively that it led one Democratic senator to block her confirmation.
Asked by Polis whether prescription drugs were more addictive than marijuana, Leonhart again skirted the question.
"All illegal drugs in Schedule I are addictive," she said, before avoiding a question about whether prescription pills were more harmful than marijuana.
Leonhart has been a controversial figure in the drug policy reform community since she was named acting administrator of the DEA in the wake of her predecessor Karen Tandy's departure.
While her opponents in the marijuana policy reform community were particularly upset at her nomination, due to suggestions that she would ignore an earlier announcement by the Obama administration about making marijuana crackdowns a low priority, she also ran into trouble when reports surfaced that DEA officials had become entangled in a Ponzi scheme.
Despite these concerns, she was eventually confirmed by a unanimous vote in late 2010. Meanwhile, the Obama administration's previous pledge to deemphasize marijuana enforcement appears to have gone by the wayside.




http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/21/michele-leonhart-dea-crack-heroin-marijuana_n_1615270.html
 
K

KSP

Critical thinking skills. How are these fucktards nominated and approved?


133706135336.jpg
 

Snoopster

Active member
Veteran
Polis absolutely schooled her and did it without being a douche.
He is on my short list of politicians that are not total fuckheads.

Polis was trying to get her to say that marijuana was less dangerous so he could ask why it is listed as a schedule one drug. She knew it and would not play along. So Polis made her look like an idiot.

She isn't stupid, but she is an evil whore.
 

bombadil.360

Andinismo Hierbatero
Veteran
she should have started singing: "i believe i can fly, i believe i can touch the sky..."

their new motto should be: Beliefs, the new science.
 

lost in a sea

Lifer
Veteran
no science is the new belief :biglaugh:

she's been hired to play dumb anyway,, the drug war is very important to them stealing even more of our sovereignty so they just play safe and say that they are all dangerous,, whilst at the same time they brew up their brands of classical poison for us...

you cant be trusted to alter your neurochemistry so the state wants in on that,,

here's the clip since i couldnt see a link to it,,

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ykwaXsQY6Eg
 

Snoopster

Active member
Veteran
She answered just like a politician does.

I also found out that this site macros the word c unt
I don't throw that word around much, but is seems apropos in this case.
 
J

joejusttyped

She sounds like a total drone. Clueless fucking idiot of a human being.
 
She was tailoring her testimony for maximum job security. Truth be damned, under oath means less than nothing. She is not a drug expert, she is a bureaucrat.
 
She's not an idiot. Some of you guys act like she could have given an honest answer and chose not to. No. She'd be unemployed if she was honest.

Cynical kunt of a human being? Yes. Idiot? doubtful. She makes damn good money, and yesterday was probably the hardest she has ever worked in her entire life. She ain't no dummy.
 

Anti

Sorcerer's Apprentice
Veteran
She answered just like a politician does.
She was tailoring her testimony for maximum job security. Truth be damned, under oath means less than nothing. She is not a drug expert, she is a bureaucrat.
She's not an idiot. Some of you guys act like she could have given an honest answer and chose not to. No. She'd be unemployed if she was honest.

Jared Polis - doing it right.

Question - why do we allow people testifying to give the same non-answer over and over again? Everybody is smart enough to see that she deliberately doesn't answer the questions directly.

Why do any of us let people get away with this sort of thing?

The last quote above is from a different thread on this topic, but I want to ask you guys since we all see it. We all know her answer is bullshit. We all know that nearly anything any politician says to us in public is bullshit. So why do we accept it?

Why do we allow people to give a non-answer without just outright calling them on it?
 
Top