Paul Says Citizens Will Rise to End Drug War
The following piece was produced by the Huffington Post's OffTheBus.
There is something important to remember about conventional wisdom: it's almost never the same thing as real wisdom. Conventional wisdom in politics says you can't be against the War on Drugs and win election to federal office.
Ron Paul has done it repeatedly, and in very conservative south Texas districts. It's not because his opponents didn't make it an issue.
When activist Phillip Allen caught up with Paul Oct. 23 and asked how his opposition to Prohibition had effected him on the campaign trail, Paul told him "It really hasn't hurt."
He went on to describe his return to Congress in 1996. After serving in Congress from 1976 to 1984, Paul took twelve years off, and that was when he really began to express his opposition to the War on Drugs. Paul said that in 1996, his Republican primary opponent spent a pile of money attacking his drug policy stance, but to no avail. Then the Democrat focused on attacking Paul's anti-prohibitionism in the general election. But Paul stayed on message and prevailed, to the disbelief of drug warriors in his district.
"I think the people are way ahead of the government and the politicians," he concluded.
Paul explained that he has long been optimistic Drug Prohibition would end similarly to Alcohol Prohibition, with a general public awakening to the policy's unintended consequences. He said Alcohol Prohibition ended abruptly when the country realized it was counterproductive and "crazy."
"I think we're going to get to that point (with drugs), and I think we're approaching it right now," he said.
Any person who gives Paul five minutes to explain himself will understand the former obstetrician is deeply concerned about our society's very real drug problems. "As a physician I just think it's a horrible problem, drug addiction, but I think it's a medical problem," he told Allen. "We don't put alcoholics in prison."
Paul tops this "Anti-Prohibitionist Candidate Report Card" with an A plus. But are Republican primary voters ready to admit the War on Drugs has been a disaster?
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Why should we coddle people who would prefer to escape from life stoned on there ass?
Anybody adopt their crack babies?
This is where the left totally gets it wrong. What are you going to legalize? Pot? Extasy? Meth? LSD? Coccane? ... Most will say no no, not legalize, just not enforce the laws. And the difference is?
This is a tough issue. My life has been very negatively impacted by meth, and I've never even tried it. I divorced my first husband after 29 years of marriage because he couldn't give up selling and doing meth. My next "husband" was addicted to meth and the damage he did before he quit is one of the reasons we're not together now. I don't know about any other drugs, but meth HAS to be illegal and those who use or sell it need to be punished. It's the worst drug ever.
Meth has become so prevalent because it can be made with things from the store. Were it not for "TGWOD" (the global war on drugs) Meth would probably not have become the problem it is.
Another unintended consequence.
The hypocrisy of allowing Big Pharma to sell drugs at a huge profit, many of which have side effects both known and unknown, while forbidding use of weed and opiates is disgusting.
And we all know it's all about money.
Drug War = Billions of dollars for cops and prisons.
Forget about the fact that your car window was smashed so someone could steal whatever was inside to trade for a high from the local dealer.
Drugs would be dirt cheap without prohibition.
Clinics would sprout up for addicts to get their daily dose, or treatment if desired. In any case, they wouldn't be out on the street causing problems for the rest of us.
If somebody wants to live in a heroin fog, let'em.
There's plenty of people downing a fifth of vodka/gin/scotch/bourbon... every day. Abuse of alcohol can kill, too.
Cigarettes are available everywhere. They kill, and not just the smoker.
I do not in any way mean to make light of your personal tragedies brought about by your loved ones becoming addicted to a really awful drug. However, meth is illegal now and has been illegal, and making it illegal did nothing at all to prevent these addictions and tragedies.
Sparkandy,
You sound like a nice person, ...but...
How can you miss the fact that 'the war on drugs' did not help you at all?
You do know the definition of insanity , right?
What we legalize is personal responsibility. (Crack babies are much less of a problem than fetal alcohol syndrome babies...look it up.) Now, we criminalize individuals for a personal substance preference without any requirement to show that any harm has been caused. That is unjust.
Your view of drug use is quite un-informed. Pot is harmless. I would love to see it legalized. Crack cocaine? No. Powdered cocaine? No. Meth is poison. Extasy can be dangerous. LSD? Not much of that around these days. It is not an easy substance to manufacture.
We could easily adopt programs to help ween addicts off of the dangerous drugs, without involving the penal system.
legalize it all. take some of the incentive out of it to conduct criminal activity and get the money generated from it outside of the law.
that would also prohibit the CIA to run illegal drug wars..their secret piggy bank account.
See, I do wholehartedly agree with at least some of the posters on this site.
Yes, the drug war is a colassal failure and a waste of time and money.
Go Ron Paul.
Way to go, Dr. Paul. Once again, a very sane, clear, and unexpected (to some) position on a very important issue that most other candidates don't want to talk about. And I LOVE seeing his optimism grow as he realizes the true power of free access to information. Keep spreading the word and an eye on this most powerful tool. Those in power can not be comfortable...
Not only does the drug war create crime by fueling black markets, but it has also been used to destroy civil liberties and justify a very aggressive police-state mentality among law enforcement.
Prohibition has never worked and will never work in a free society.
Ron Paul. Bless him. I wish he had a bigger fan club; it would give me hope.
P.S. We put thousands of alcoholics in prison every year.
Maybe his fan club is bigger than the polls indicate. Raising $4 million in one day is very impressive. Makes one wonder about these polls.
"We put thousands of alcoholics in prison every year."
They are not put in prison because they are alcoholics. Being an alcoholic is not illegal.
Do alcoholics commit crimes? Of course they do, and that is what lands them in the big house, not alcohol use.
"zero tolerance"...uh huh, that's conservative.....RIGHT!
if you commit violent crimes, sure, but one-vehicle DUI's?
My Dad is a retired Marine Col, and subsequent civilian Director of Detention for several Florida Counties, and HE thinks the War on Drugs is INSANE. It takes $46,000/yr to incarcerate each prisoner. Would it take that much to medically treat victims of addiction? Perhaps, but I know the recidivism rate would drastically drop.
His fan club is HUGE. You just aren't seeing the revolution being televised as much as the status quo. That is changing, he is beating them at their own game - raising money. The difference is that it's coming from the people, bottom-up, not top down.
Average donation on Nov 5th's loot?: $103, 37,000 =/- people, $4.2 million dollars, in ONE DAY.
What is not published much is the boots on the ground work being done. 1,200 meetup groups, canvasing (w/o offical interaction) rallies, festivals, sporting events, sign wavings, charity work, etc. People are spending alot more of their money on signage, travel, highway billboards, radio ads, newspaper adds, writing editorials, retorts, commentaries, etc. I see no other grassroots effort that compares to it.
It is amazing, contagious, and refreshing.
blue dog dem for ron paul
thank you for your article, keep up the good word.
So let's help the progressive anti-drug-war presidential candidate raise 4 million in one day.
C'mon! What's the matter with you people? Support Mike Gravel.
I wish it was Ron Paul vs. Mike Gravel. They could have a Presidential debate about who would dismantle the D.E.A. the fastest.
check out thisnovember5th.com
ron paul raised over $3,800,000 in one day!
the mainstream media
It's time for the Green Libertarian party to be formed. While some may think it's impossible to wrap the tail ends of the political spectrum together, it may be possible to find common cause on issues such as ending drug laws and reversing the increase of corporate power. Teddy Roosevelt pursued similar values, taking on the trusts while supporting the protection of nature. Populist values are at the core of both tails, and might be sufficient to permit people to be "left alone" on the thorny issues of birth control, gun control, and religiosity.
I was a Libertarian from 1972 through 2000, then switched to Green. While it is true that the far right and far left converge, the basic tenet of Libertarianism is that private property rights are sacred. This perpetuates the ill-gotten wealth of an elite, and ignores the reality of of a shrinking ecosystem.
Ron Paul is the only acceptable candidate in 2008, and he is compeletly right about the failure of the war on drugs. He's right about many other things also, and Rebublicans should consider my opinion, rather than common wisdom.
Hillary is VERY vulnerable, because she has 49%-50% negatives in the polls, and there is only one way the Republicans could lose to her. That's if the R. nominee fails to seperate himself enough from GWB and his foolish, failed policies.
So that's where the most popular R. candidate would actually be a loser while a outside shot like Ron Paul would have a much better chance to crush the Hilldebeast. I wonder if they will listen to me?
"Hillary is VERY vulnerable, because she has 49%-50% negatives in the polls, and there is only one way the Republicans could lose to her. That's if the R. nominee fails to seperate himself enough from GWB and his foolish, failed policies."
You're living in LaLa land.
Hillary doesn't need any of the 45% who don't like her to vote for her, and the chances of a Republitard candidate "distancing themselves" from Chimpy is remote.
Ron Paul is going to surely be the upset winner in New Hampshire and possibly Iowa.
The USA's war on Drugs in a complete and utter failure.
Chris Dodd agrees, and so does Joe Biden.
Matt, everything you said that has transpired between Tx14th and Ron Paul is true..
Tom Delay split his district and by doing so, created an Independent majority along with several Catholic Democrats that also support Ron Paul.
Galveston was founded under Catholic Charities.
After the 1900 Hurricane and the Biggest Catholic orphanage lost 10,000 kids and nuns, it was the Catholic church that brought Galveston back.
The charities built the 7 mile long Seawall, the charities raised the Island 3 feet.
Notice government did not have anything to do with this.
Dr. Pauls idea of smaller government is right on.
It is a long time coming.
We should never trust government to take care of us, they always fail!
Katrina.
Rita.
Wildfires.
Flooding.
Always a failure.
Yet we throw hundreds of billions of dollars to a government that cant be trusted and is known to steal it from the people for which it was intended.
Your posts have always been right-on, Matt.
Thanks for taking the time to do your homework.
This is somewhat deeper into the subject of which he was talking.
He has been saying this for thirty years...So has Dennis Kucinich, Jackson Lee, Gravel, Sanders,
Cynthia Mckinney, etc...
I think you will find this interview by Aaron Russo interesting.
He was the best.
http://video.stumbleupon.com/#p=mhfy61li0w
If William F. Buckley and my father, a retired Marine Col and subsequent Director of Corrections in several Florida Counties wants to end the War on Drugs, people really should listen. It's a medical problem. And if the crime committed is not violent against others, we shouldn't be paying $46,000 a year to incarcerate them!
www.thisnovember5th.com
www.ronpaul2008.com
"Prohibitive legislation enacted to prevent people from determining their own reactions to psychedelics strikes at one of the most fundamental of all liberties, the liberty of the individual to explore his own inner world by means of his own choosing."
--Robert S. DeRopp, THE MASTER GAME
The ABUSE of naturally occurring substances that change human focus is not a medical problem--it indicates a profound spiritual problem that's all about self-transcendence.
These amazing, natural herbs are here on Earth for a reason: to assist humanity in the evolution of its awareness. Dosing oneself cannot be a crime because there's no "victim"--but maligning and banning the plants and their use IS a crime in which we are ALL victims! It's even a slap in faces of the founding fathers who grew cannabis in their gardens and recognized in the United States Declaration of Independence that the "pursuit of happiness" was one of man's "unalienable [not subject to forfeiture--cc] rights."
Rather than being prohibited, natural focus-altering herbs should be recognized and honored for the spiritual sacraments they are--and humanity should be schooled to USE them in awe and reverence.
"To be shaken out of the ruts of ordinary [ego--cc] perception, to be shown for a few timeless hours the outer and inner world, not as they appear to an animal obsessed with survival or to a human being obsessed with words and notions [and money--cc], but as they are apprehended, directly and unconditionally, by Mind at Large--this is an experience of inestimable value to everyone and especially to the intellectual."
--Aldous Huxley, THE DOORS OF PERCEPTION
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
