Former US President Jimmy Carter: Call off Global Drug War

[gaiusmarius]

Good points. I believe Ellsberg offered that every president including and since Vietnam has violated (presidential) constitutional war powers. According to Ellsberg, Patriot Act has since made Nixon's crimes legal if happened today. The article didn't mention other presidential crimes but did example Libya as Obama's constitutional violation. Violated the Patriot Act itself? The article didn't specify.

Maybe it's Obama that'll be alongside Karadzic?

as far as i'm concerned bush snr, clinton, bush jr and obama are all criminals against humanity according to international law. they all invaded sovereign nations without just cause, they all let depleted uranium munitions be used, they all take massive civilian casualties in their stride. at this point the drone program alone kills 50 for every 1 person targeted. while the du residue is causing whole new generations of deformed and disabled, as well as massive increase of cancer and respiratory and skin disease in both the population in and near the war zone, but also amongst the operators of du firing armaments. so excuse me if i laugh while they talk about evil Gaddafi. his crimes are as nothing in comparison.

 

[grapeman]

Wasn't opec putting the energy clamps on us pretty bad then? I think we called it embargo. W's damage came in the form of deficits, national debt and unemployment. Biggest thing that messed Carter up was a rabbit, a sweater and a solar panel.

If you hate deficits so much, you must really dislike obama, an idealist neophyte who has taken deficits to a level that even our great grandkids can never re-pay. Or, do you have a way of deflecting double standards as most all good liberals do?

It's not just me that thinks carter is one of our worst presidents in history. Historians do too.

But either way, if carter promotes legalizing all drugs, that's a good libertarian view I can support. too bad he has burned up all of his credibility over the years.

 

[grapeman]

as far as i'm concerned bush snr, clinton, bush jr and obama are all criminals against humanity according to international law. they all invaded sovereign nations without just cause, they all let depleted uranium munitions be used, they all take massive civilian casualties in their stride. at this point the drone program alone kills 50 for every 1 person targeted.

Hmmm. A novel concept. Innocent people dying in a war. No tears here.

Always nitpicking at the expense of the bigger picture. Innocents die in war. Sorta like the 3,000 at the world trade center.

but if your contention is that the US does more evil then good in the world, which is the typical public school teaching, then don't let facts get in the way of reasoning.

Want to rant? Why not rant about the millions killed in China by Mao? Or the hundreds of thousands of innocents killed by Che and Castro? Or in Laos? Or be brave enough to defend the innocent muslims being killed each and every day by radical muslims. Or is that too easy? It's always easier to decry America from the cheap seats when pure evil and hate runs rampant world wide (extreme islam), which you intentionally ignore. Especially when america, while far from perfect, has done more to defend the common man over history then all other countries combined. And paid for that defense with blood. Try a visit to Arlington sometimes and wake up.

Historical facts are stubborn things, aren't they? Video taped be-headings kind of get in the way of your idealist logic, or lack thereof.

BTW - quoting "international law" is a joke is it not?

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

If you hate deficits so much, you must really dislike obama, an idealist neophyte who has taken deficits to a level that even our great grandkids can never re-pay. Or, do you have a way of deflecting double standards as most all good liberals do?

It's not just me that thinks carter is one of our worst presidents in history. Historians do too.

But either way, if carter promotes legalizing all drugs, that's a good libertarian view I can support. too bad he has burned up all of his credibility over the years.

Our great grandkids couldn't pay for two wars, two tax cuts and part D (all borrowed.) These were the guys that said deficits don't matter. Deflecting a double standard might come in the form of a president who welcomes the hatred of more evenly-applied austerity, such as an FDR.

Deflecting double standard might come in the form of one stripe consistently returning deficits and the other surpluses. However, the current stripe won't see surpluses (like all his stripe's predecessors since Ike) because the show was too wrecked to salvage.

How does a senior citizen who promotes, organizes and manufactures housing for the poor and lower middle-class constitute poor credibility? I guess that peace prize is a real black eye to some, tells the world the recipient isn't John Wayne.

IMO, Carter's policies weren't in the economic realm. We had a rather new economic phenomenon happening in the late 70s and naturally Carter didn't help as he's not an economist. However Carter did return a surplus to revenues, not a deficit.

IMO, even worse than the hostage crisis (which Reagan had to deal with the devil to resolve) was an energy policy that was decades before it's time. National speed limits saved more fuel and lives than any other president's energy policy. Note to self - no other president ever had an energy policy and voluntary conservation was the only way a non-supply sider could get any public traction.

Donning sweaters and turning down the thermostats didn't set well with Reganites either. But the people that did this recognized the savings. If we'd all done it, we'd have conserved more energy than we used. Industry estimates as much as 40% to half of our national energy is wasted.

Big Energy lobby - What, using half the energy we sell today?.. Here's some big campaign bucks to get you elected and we'll say ol' Carter was wearing a skirt with that sweater.

When energy limits are mandated, voluntary conservation measures will look a lot more friendly and many will wish we'd taken these measures more seriously. All we need is somebody at the top advocating voluntary efficiency and conservation methods that we can all practice to spend less and save more. We had that with Carter.

One aspect even Carter himself wouldn't defend was his poor leadership. Basically, no lawmakers wanted to follow his proposals. Nobody's fault there but Carter (or the possibility he was 4 to 5 decades before his time.) But I'll never forget the nuclear physicist lending his expertise to a nation that wasn't necessarily getting the skinny from the early days of 3-Mile Island. Carter couldn't say [with certainty] what was happening but he did help calm fears of what wasn't happening and what wouldn't happen. Turns out he was right. We didn't experience meltdown and that possibility didn't exist because we knew enough at the time to prevent it.

 

[SpasticGramps]

I paid 18.5% interest on the first home I bought thanks to that peanut.

The Federal Reserve sets interest rates not Presidents. Maybe your beef should be with Volcker?

I'm not standing up for Jimmy Boy. I dislike all modern Presidents equally.

 

[Cojito]

Andrew Jackson will for ever be a hero to all enemies of the federal reserve. he fought the international bankers to a standstill and killed off their attempt to force a central bank on the people. yes he was ruthless in pursuit of his goals in war.

well, i don't reckon the Trail of Tears was "war," but i hear ya, what's a little ethnic cleansing among friends.

 

[bentom187]

volkers on the global commision on drug policy

» Asma Jahangir
- human rights activist, former UN Special Rapporteur on Arbitrary, Extrajudicial and Summary Executions, Pakistan

» Carlos Fuentes
- writer and public intellectual, Mexico

» César Gaviria
- former President of Colômbia

» Ernesto Zedillo
- former President of México

» Fernando Henrique Cardoso
- former President of Brazil (chair)

» George Papandreou
- Prime Minister of Greece

» George Shultz
- former Secretary of State, United States (honorary chair)

» Javier Solana
- former European Union High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, Spain

» John Whitehead
- banker and civil servant, chair of the World Trade Center Memorial, United States

» Kofi Annan
- former Secretary General of the United Nations, Ghana

» Louise Arbour
- former UN High Commissioner for Human Rights, president of the International Crisis Group, Canada

» Maria Cattaui
- Member of the Board, Petroplus Holdings; former Secretary-General of the International Chamber of Commerce, Switzerland

» Marion Caspers-Merk
- former State Secretary at the German Federal Ministry of Health, Germany

» Mario Vargas Llosa
- writer and public intellectual, Peru

» Michel Kazatchkine
- executive director of the Global Fund to Fight AIDS, Tuberculosis and Malaria, France

» Paul Volcker
- former Chairman of the US Federal Reserve and of the Economic Recovery Board, US

» Richard Branson
- entrepreneur, advocate for social causes, founder of the Virgin Group, cofounder of The Elders, United Kingdom

» Ruth Dreifuss
- former President of Switzerland and Minister of Home Affairs

» Thorvald Stoltenberg
- former Minister of Foreign Affairs and UN High Commissioner for Refugees, Norway

 

[SpasticGramps]

as far as i'm concerned bush snr, clinton, bush jr and obama are all criminals against humanity according to international law. they all invaded sovereign nations without just cause, they all let depleted uranium munitions be used, they all take massive civilian casualties in their stride. at this point the drone program alone kills 50 for every 1 person targeted. while the du residue is causing whole new generations of deformed and disabled, as well as massive increase of cancer and respiratory and skin disease in both the population in and near the war zone, but also amongst the operators of du firing armaments. so excuse me if i laugh while they talk about evil Gaddafi. his crimes are as nothing in comparison.

They give Nobel Peace Prizes out these days for invading countries and waging illegal wars.

 

[grapeman]

Our great grandkids couldn't pay for two wars, two tax cuts and part D (all borrowed.) These were the guys that said deficits don't matter. Deflecting a double standard might come in the form of a president who welcomes the hatred of more evenly-applied austerity, such as an FDR.

You lose me when you say "more evenly applied austerity".

You can try (and I think it a noble goal) to allow opportunities for success for everyone, but social engineering successful OUTCOMES for everyone is socialism.

No matter what, you cannot guarantee even outcomes in life. And I don't think I should pay for those who fail. Let them pick themselves up and try again. I have.

BTW - the way to offer a path to success to more people is to get the fucking government out of the way and out of our life, not to bring more rules and regulations to the masses.

 

[grapeman]

The Federal Reserve sets interest rates not Presidents. Maybe your beef should be with Volcker?

I'm not standing up for Jimmy Boy. I dislike all modern Presidents equally.

True!

But just as the winning/losing QB gets the love/disdain of the fans, so does the president.

Carter was, and still is, a loser.

But i agree with his stance on drug legalization.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

You lose me when you say "more evenly applied austerity".

One stripe is going after Medicare with little to no other policies to distribute the pain. Oh yeah, the rich will suffer more painful tax cuts. No mention of military spending contractions despite record expenditures. A rich class that shuns the idea of a 4% income-tax rate increase while the present Medicare offer extracts far more from the working class. We can't buy all their stuff if our buying power goes toward substantially more health care costs.

You can try (and I think it a noble goal) to allow opportunities for success for everyone, but social engineering successful OUTCOMES for everyone is socialism.

No matter what, you cannot guarantee even outcomes in life. And I don't think I should pay for those who fail. Let them pick themselves up and try again. I have.

I'm not sure the rising middle-class ethic makes one more or less noble. While I do have empathy for all, it's my opinion that economics for all works best for all. We don't have any history that the rich pull us up from our bootstraps. But laws like a 40 hour work week, overtime wages, minimum wage, labor organization, etc transformed our middle class into a national economic force.

Did we have fraud as a result. Yes we did. No different than the fraud the emanates from the top. The problem with top fraud is far fewer players makes far greater implications.

grampeman, my principles hold no more water than yours or the next guy's. I'm just opinionated and don't mind expressing. That's no indication I know what I'm talking about. Historic indicators aren't a magic wand and what worked before might not work again. IMO, it's better than a path we've yet to blaze, or worse got burned.

 

[zen_trikester]

Wow... you guys are not savoring this even a little bit are you? At the end of the day, a respected man (not by you maybe, but you already know the truth about MJ) and Nobel peace prize winner, and a former US president just endorsed legalizing marijuana. That is huge and probably the BEST MJ related news to come down the pike in my 40+ year lifetime.

I think it is awesome and very telling that an ex US president agrees with another group of ex leaders of their countries, that MJ is safe and needs to be regulated. Not some ex cops, not some actors, not some cancer survivors, and not some Moms who care about their kids. These are former world leaders, who are no longer bound to their financial supporters, uniting to help us legalize Marijuana and end the drug war. People making up for past indiscretions and perpetual funding of a drug war that has truly failed in every way imaginable. I don't care why, I just care what, and this is a huge what.

If this commission really gets behind promoting this and picks up a few more Jimmy Carters along the way then this is a done deal. These people have the power to influence the masses. We don't like them because we don't like ANY politicians! After they are off the payroll maybe we should show them some love though huh? Was Carter the best president? No, but I'm willing to let him shine now if that is his calling. We should all write him letters to keep that fire burning and tell him how we appreciate what he is doing today because this is for us. this is for the people in jail and the kids who can't get student loans, and the fathers who loose their kids and the people who loose their jobs, and the people who use marijuana as medicine or as an alternative to alcohol... this is for us. Thanks Jimmy! You are now my favorite president.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Wow... you guys are not savoring this even a little bit are you? At the end of the day, a respected man (not by you maybe, but you already know the truth about MJ) and Nobel peace prize winner, and a former US president just endorsed legalizing marijuana. That is huge and probably the BEST MJ related news to come down the pike in my 40+ year lifetime.

I think it is awesome and very telling that an ex US president agrees with another group of ex leaders of their countries, that MJ is safe and needs to be regulated. Not some ex cops, not some actors, not some cancer survivors, and not some Moms who care about their kids. These are former world leaders, who are no longer bound to their financial supporters, uniting to help us legalize Marijuana and end the drug war. People making up for past indiscretions and perpetual funding of a drug war that has truly failed in every way imaginable. I don't care why, I just care what, and this is a huge what.

If this commission really gets behind promoting this and picks up a few more Jimmy Carters along the way then this is a done deal. These people have the power to influence the masses. We don't like them because we don't like ANY politicians! After they are off the payroll maybe we should show them some love though huh? Was Carter the best president? No, but I'm willing to let him shine now if that is his calling. We should all write him letters to keep that fire burning and tell him how we appreciate what he is doing today because this is for us. this is for the people in jail and the kids who can't get student loans, and the fathers who loose their kids and the people who loose their jobs, and the people who use marijuana as medicine or as an alternative to alcohol... this is for us. Thanks Jimmy! You are now my favorite president.

I saw Carter on live TV advocating decriminalized mj and treatment for drug addicts 35 years ago. The DEA was a baby and Carter was already spanking it's mission as practically and economically unsound. As president, Carter's the guy that coined the phrase, The punishment should not be worse than the act/crime whatever.

But I know that many people hate the guy, even if he personally plugged their oxygen tent into the power socket. They'd rather see Kevorkian pull it back out.

Aside from Carter's dissing the drug war, I don't think he necessarily advocates your right to blaze. IMO, he'd like to see you get treatment to stop blazing altogether. But he beats a drug warrior's attitude any day of the week.

I happen to think Carter was one of our better presidents, drug views or not. Carter didn't full-swing the economic pendulum like two successors would and did. IMO, Carter didn't commit presidential war crimes which is rare to nonexistent in recent history.

Not to mention that 90% of his post-presidency efforts are humanitarian. And he hasn't stopped, despite half a country that hates the ground he walks on. Great people seek great causes and few are in the same class as Carter, let alone rise above.

 

[imnotkrazy]

zen trikester, that is an excellent way to put it!

Carter was too good a man to be the leader of this country with a history of crooked, self-serving politickers in my opinion. I would not vote a Democrat or Republican ticket, but just might vote for Carter as himself, but that was ten years before I was of age to vote, so it's moot.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

Carter was too good a man to be the leader of this country with a history of crooked, self-serving politickers in my opinion.

I agree. If the public had been behind Carter the way they were FDR, all the crooks in politics and business alike wouldn't have stopped Carter from doing more great things.

 

[paladin420]

First he fixes North Korea!! Now us!!! Go Jimmy Go

 

[gaiusmarius]

well, i don't reckon the Tail of Tears was "war," but i hear ya, what's a little ethnic cleansing among friends.

yeah that's the dark side of Andrew Jackson's life story. truly an evil action. in those days people really didn't see the Indians as equal. it's a depressing part of American history.

how ever wrong he was about the native Americans, he was damn sure right about what would happen if a central bank was allowed to the money powers of the day. his action in opposing the creation of a central bank insured generations would prosper as free people. until they finally got their central bank in 1913, since which time the dollar has lost 96% of the value it had back then.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

IMO, it's GDP less inflation that more effectively values the present dollar. My gramps was born in 1882 and said the early 19th century wage required two weeks of labor to buy a pair of shoes. That's what he made hoeing potatoes for $1 per 10 hr day. Those shoes were $14 but $14 couldn't buy em. He had to purchase share-crop style or there was nothing else available and no money to trade. Obviously he was part of the 99% that had nothing but the desire to work for what one had to have to survive.

 

[grapeman]

grampeman, my principles hold no more water than yours or the next guy's. I'm just opinionated and don't mind expressing. That's no indication I know what I'm talking about. Historic indicators aren't a magic wand and what worked before might not work again. IMO, it's better than a path we've yet to blaze, or worse got burned.

I agree there. One thing though. I've worked my entire life. Many different jobs. I've never worked for a person poorer then me. So I just don't get where and how the conversation turned to "the rich don't pay their fair share". I see that as pure baloney. I know what I pay and I don't consider myself rich. Somehow, the failures of society have been swooped up by the progressives and now I'm told I didn't pay enough for the failures (most who made multiple bad decisions) throughout my life time.

Hog wash. We've spent trillions on the war on poverty and we still have roughly the same % as we've always had (maybe more today since the housing bubble burst) at the poverty line or below. Giving people free things is not compassionate. Giving them a chance at an education so they can be productive members of society is compassionate. But there is no guarantee of success. Don't tell me your little league doesn't keep score and give all kids a trophy?

We can't MAKE these losers successful in life. No matter how much money we GIVE them.

Did you ever wonder why so many lotto winners are broke again in a few years?

Fuck 'em. Life goes on. I don't and won't pay more taxes just to watch the government throw it away. Better off supporting local boys & girls clubs, soup kitchens and religious help organizations.

They almost always help local folks in a way that the government can only dream of at 1/2 the cost.

 

[DiscoBiscuit]

I agree there. One thing though. I've worked my entire life. Many different jobs. I've never worked for a person poorer then me. So I just don't get where and how the conversation turned to "the rich don't pay their fair share". I see that as pure baloney. I know what I pay and I don't consider myself rich. Somehow, the failures of society have been swooped up by the progressives and now I'm told I didn't pay enough for the failures (most who made multiple bad decisions) throughout my life time.

Where you're long on outlook, you may be short on statistics. You know, biggest income disparity and all that?

Hog wash. We've spent trillions on the war on poverty and we still have roughly the same % as we've always had (maybe more today since the housing bubble burst) at the poverty line or below.

We've spent hundreds of billions on entitlements but no nation in history has spent that magnitude on the poor. You're lumping demographics together and labeling it all poverty.

I'm not accustomed to your statistical offerings but I wonder where you get those percentages. Just general mindset?

Giving people free things is not compassionate. Giving them a chance at an education so they can be productive members of society is compassionate. But there is no guarantee of success. Don't tell me your little league doesn't keep score and give all kids a trophy?

Your degrees of example are quite vast. The less people have, the less opportunity they have to better their economic conditions. IMO, guarantee is another example of off/on policy ideas that eschew better because perfect doesn't exist.

We can't MAKE these losers successful in life. No matter how much money we GIVE them.

Did you ever wonder why so many lotto winners are broke again in a few years?

Nah, I just wonder why you roll such vast differences into such convenient category.

Fuck 'em. Life goes on. I don't and won't pay more taxes just to watch the government throw it away. Better off supporting local boys & girls clubs, soup kitchens and religious help organizations.

They almost always help local folks in a way that the government can only dream of at 1/2 the cost.

I remember Archie oversimplifying and Meathead trying to broaden Arch's perspective . Ol' Meathead was smart but even he was too dumb to know that Arch only wanted to see what Arch already thought.