Okay, now that we’ve let George Will have his say, let’s get on with our comparison shopping of the candidates. Today, we’ll examine George W. Bush and both his nearly admitted drug use and his plans for everyone who follows in his shallow footsteps.
In so far as Tumbleweed’s purported drug policies in this campaign, there really isn’t much of any substance (surprise, surprise!) Even his own home page offers all of just two sentences on the issue, neither of which add up to much. Consider the following:
Under the bold heading Drug Policy, the site offers these pearls of wisdom; “Governor Bush believes we have a responsibility to confront the problem of illegal drug abuse because drugs are destroying our neighborhoods and ruining lives. We should confront this scourge with a balanced policy of education, treatment, and law enforcement.”
Whew! I’m just all charged up and a rarin” to go, aren’t you? Let’s all confront this scourge, shall we?
But wait, shouldn’t every candidate for the highest office show that his life was lived in the exact same level of behavior that he is demanding of the rest of us? If the President can’t admit to his own past drug and alcohol abuse, what right does he have enforcing any law that punishes others for the same sins he committed and now brushes off as “youthful indiscretions”?
In fact, since the closest that Tumbleweed has got in either affirming his use of cocaine or to deny that he ever used it was to claim, in a very Clinton way, that he would only say that he was drug free since he was 28 years old. ( 1 )
How has Texas fared under the nose of this nearly admitted cocaine user? According to a study done by the Texas Commission on Alcohol and Drug Abuse, for grades 7 through 12, the figures have risen every year since Bush became Governor. (For those of you with queasy tummies I must warn you, the following isn’t pretty. Neither, apparently, is my ability to create lists in html.)
Ever used any illicit drug
Maybe deep within that chunk of manure that Bush has for a brain, he has the sense to feel some pity for those who have followed in his shallow footprints and used the same drugs that he, himself, has very nearly admitted to have done. Would he possibly support allowing the courts to have the latitude to set a person’s sentence to fit the level of the crime? In other words, does Bush support the elimination of mandatory sentencing? You know, the "Compassionate Conservative" thing? Do bears poop on the moon?
Here’s his answer during a debate in January of this year, to the question, “Should we restore greater desecration to the judiciary in deciding the appropriate sentence in each case?
“No, no. I worry about federal judges who will use the bench to interpret the law the way they see fit. I think it’s really important to have a president who appoints people who strictly interpret the Constitution and do not use the bench to write law. And I think it’s very important for the legislative branch, with the signature of the president, to instruct federal judges as to how to handle a case across jurisdictional lines ... So, no, I don’t think we ought to be giving federal judges a lot of flexibility on sentencing guidelines.”
Apparently, now that he is no longer in imminent danger of being busted for his nearly admitted use of cocaine, Tumbleweed now not only wants to put everybody and their brother into prison for the longest possible time, but he wants to make certain that no judge is allowed to use his training and intelligence to determine the severity of each case on its own merits.
In fact, Bush happily sent a 27 year old mother to jail for eight months for the horrendous crime of possessing a pipe that had cocaine “residue”. Was this woman a repeat offender? Nope, this was her very first brush with the law. Was she obviously stoned when she was arrested? No, in fact the arresting officers, after a thorough search of the car in which she was a passenger and which they had approached because it was “illegally parked”, found absolutely no trace of any illegal substances on the mother or the other two women in the car. Did the pipe appear to have ever been used to smoke cocaine? No, again. Even the arresting officers reported that the only reason that she was initially arrested and the pipe impounded was because the pipe was “suspicious” and they had to have a well equipped lab test the pipe to find this “residue”. Finally, did this woman, in any way, appear to be high or hiding anything or even acting suspicious in order that the officers acquired the right to search her purse in the first place? Again, according to the arresting officers, their suspicions were raised when the mother made a “furtive movement”. Was that movement along the lines of trying to hide her purse or remove the pipe or something that might have caused the officers to be in fear for their own safety. Well, according to them they felt in danger because the woman, “touched her nose.” ( 3 )
So, now that we see that Tumbleweed has no official policy to offer even on his web site that shows his intended focus on a drug policy if he is elected, we do see that he has completely failed to stem the use of drugs in Texas and, as we’ve seen, even sat by, collecting his tens of millions in campaign funds, watching the drug problem explode among his state’s children. We also see that his aim is not to help any American caught up in the insane War on Americans Who Use the Wrong Drugs but, rather, to punish every case equally, no matter what the actual facts may be. (Of course, his God, Ronald Reagan, was the bozo who stated that “Facts are stupid things.” ( 4 )
So, if we were allowed to ask this wee little hypocrite a few questions during this campaign, what would they be?
Q. How can you support a “zero-tolerance” policy on drugs when you, yourself, have nearly admitted using them?
Q. If the use of drugs is always the result of a personal failure, what right does he have to run for the nation’s highest office?
Q. If, as he so often states, what he did as a “youth” isn’t anyone’s business but his, shouldn’t he be man enough to extend that same principle to the hundreds of thousands of Americans being help in jails and prisons for the non-violent crime of using the wrong drugs?
Q. Isn’t this the greatest opportunity in his political career to actually stand up for what is right over what is politically convenient? Wouldn’t the easing of the draconian sentencing laws regarding a person’s personal use of drugs be a magnificent place to finally tear himself out from under his father’s rather insubstantial shadow?
Q. If he or his children or grandchildren were arrested and convicted of the crime only of possession of an illegal drug, would he insure that this person be sentenced and punished in the same exact way that he, himslef, should have been punished had he been caught during the time that he was experiencing his nearly admitted use of cocaine?
Finally, since we now know that Tumbleweed is as vaporous in his own moral code as he is Stalin-like in his public code, we can see that electing such a two-faced and immoral clown to any office outside of Texas would be a gross punishment on every human being both alive and yet to be born into this nation’s bosom. If he can’t come clean with his own sins, what possible use will he be if given the right to punish the innocent on a national scale?
Return To Front Page
Visit Our Unique Shops At:
The Progressive Mind
Impeach The Moron
Rosetta Stone - Your Name In Egyptian Hieroglyphs
Signs of the Zodiac Gifts