![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|
#1 |
![]() |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFgrB...ayer_embedded#!
Seriously... this lady is the head of the fucking DEA... can't give a straight answer because it would start down a path that proves she isn't needed (or at least needed in her current direction)... this kind of shit infuriates me. Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFgrB2Wmh5s&feature=player_embedded#!
__________________
2009 BMW 335i |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
![]() |
I kept waiting for an answer. I love how the guy kept asking the same question over and over to get a "real" response...
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
![]() |
unfortunately its not just whether or not she gives a straight answer... if she gave us straight answers you know that Bill O'Reilly or Sean Hannity would be screaming at the top of their lungs tonight that the Obama Administration "admitted" on the Congressional record that they were soft on drugs and wanted to get your kids and grandkids high. and that clearly the next step was to pass out Obama Joints for votes or some moronic thing or another. (and yes, Ed Schultz probably would've done something similar 4 years ago)
the guy was asking very simplistic questions regarding very complex issues in order to try and get a specific response... are almost all drugs more addictive than marijuana? seems like a simple question but its a truncated question... in your non-medical opinion, are almost all drugs more addictive than marijuana to a majority of people? and that's still a basic version of that question. he was asking for concrete answers to bad questions. I'm 100% in support of legalization of marijuana but that guy wasn't asking questions, he was trying to lead her down a path to get her to say things he wanted. she simply refused to follow him down that rabbit hole and looked the worse for it but if you really look at the situation she didn't have much of a choice.
__________________
Hamilton on requiring Congressional supermajorities "...its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority." - Federalist No. 22 |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
![]() |
Another with her... I honestly feel so fucked... and I'm absolutely not into drugs.
Video URL: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n0ujs8mRkWM&feature=youtube
__________________
2009 BMW 335i Last edited by Ricerking13; 2012-06-21 at 04:00 PM.. |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 | |
![]() |
Quote:
__________________
2009 BMW 335i |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
More awesomer than you
![]() |
You just posted the same video twice Jason.
I found the video to be pretty funny myself. ![]()
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
#7 | |
![]() |
Quote:
I'd like to laugh at it... but it's pretty scary.
__________________
2009 BMW 335i |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 | |
![]() |
Quote:
![]()
__________________
2009 BMW 335i |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Mr. Plow
![]() |
No, he is just defending his side. If Olberman bags on Ron Paul its Pauls fault.
__________________
Old as shit ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#10 | |
![]() |
Quote:
I don't think that it "should" affect what they say/don't but I'm not naive enough to think that it doesn't. the DEA Admin isn't a powerful political appointee, if they say something controversial (and 'real talk' about drugs and their actual effects on people is sadly controversial) on the Hill on tape and it becomes a political item because Hannity screams about it and next thing you know Darrell Issa is subpeona-ing half the DEA and holding people in contempt because its an election year... the 24hr news cycle combined with the vanity/stupidity of our Congress have teamed up to make straight talk on complex issues almost impossible.
__________________
Hamilton on requiring Congressional supermajorities "...its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority." - Federalist No. 22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#11 | ||
![]() |
Quote:
I don't have a side in this one. I don't like the DEA's inability to discern harmful drugs from those that aren't. I actually agree with the inherent point the Congressmen were trying to make but I think its misguided to blame this woman for being aware of the game they were trying to play and the statements they were trying to lead her into giving and refusing to be a part of it... edit* just to show how little there is a 'side' to this: Quote:
__________________
Hamilton on requiring Congressional supermajorities "...its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority." - Federalist No. 22 Last edited by phreakdna; 2012-06-21 at 05:43 PM.. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#12 |
![]() |
She is so full of shit. And her last response was just complete bs.
*Seth Myer's voice* This chick really thinks the DEA would even consider using medical marijuana to help combat the issue of people abusing prescription drugs? Really? Really?!?!
__________________
2004 Black Obsidian G35 |
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Mr. Plow
![]() |
Says the guy whose first response to her painful to watch testimony is "its the fault of those right winger hosts!"
__________________
Old as shit ![]()
|
|
|
|
|
|
#14 | |||
![]() |
She pretty much did her best Mr Mackey impression over and over. Is it bad that I'm not the least bit surprised and have come to expect this kind of thing from our government?
__________________
"It's when murder is justice that martyrs are made"
Last edited by Oblique; 2012-06-21 at 09:27 PM.. |
|||
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
![]() |
Wow. That was bad.
Phreak, I can't believe you're such a party line guy that you can't realize that, and had to try and come up with some big, long, indirect excuse.
__________________
"Go that way, really fast. If something gets in your way, turn." - Charles De Mar. "And what? Vote for the democrat who's going to blast me in the ass? Or the republican who's going to blast my ass? Either way, politics is all one big ass blasting." - Ronald MacDonald. 2011 Toyota Corolla LE 2.0, Right Hand Drive. 2004 Citroen C2 1.4 VTR. - 73 hp monster. 2013 SWP WRX Limited 5-Door ordered 1/28/2013. |
|
|
|
|
|
#16 |
![]() |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#17 | |
![]() |
Quote:
this isn't a party issue. imo, the DEA is apolitical. the history of this administrator's rise suggests that it is. I feel like I'm somehow not communicating my question/position well since few seem capable to understand that this isn't a political backing issue: 1. I disagree with the DEA's position on marijuana. 2. I thought the exchanges were pitiful by both the admin and the Congressional questioners 3. I think that entire exchange could very well be the result of our political circus. the pols wanting to score points and get a DEA official to answer a half-baked question... and the administrator for being either a. overly sensitive to how the answers could be pulled from context by people with agendas (aka "Shirley Sherrod" syndrome) or b. she's a moron.
__________________
Hamilton on requiring Congressional supermajorities "...its real operation is to embarrass the administration, to destroy the energy of government, and to substitute the pleasure, caprice, or artifices of an insignificant, turbulent or corrupt junto, to the regular deliberations and decisions of a respectable majority." - Federalist No. 22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#18 |
![]() |
Oh good lord.
Guess Obama doesn't have his own party in line. |
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |||
![]() |
LOL I may be too late to the party. But lets get one thing straight.
The woman is the representative head of the "DEA". Therefore, she cannot provide her "personal" opinion, regardless of what it is. She must represent the joint opinion of the DEA, which, by its ideals, report through a chain to the President, and are therefore part of the enforcement branch of government. It is not there role nor their right to determine lots of things about legalization, drugs, etc., it is merely there role to support it. As a spokesperson for this agency, rather than stumble about she should be answering questions that the DEA will hold to all laws which are in place in the US today, appointed by the people of the United States. Those laws are not subject to her, or the DEA's scrutiny nor can personal opinions be delivered while in uniform serving the position. She is merely offering the American public what the elected officials that were put in place by the public have agreed the country wants and desires. The legality of the laws, and whether or not the us legislation has the right to pass these laws or the DEA to enforce them falls onto the judicial branch. Anything that the public deems unnecessary should be brought to their attention via the proper channels. For effects of drugs on the human body, please refer to the AMA (American Medical Association) for extensive studies of various substances and their effects on the human body. For the effects on the populous, please refer to Sociological societies and other accredited organizations that are more specialized to provide answers to those questions."
__________________
|
|||
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|