That's Two Wars They Agree On

Jacob Sullum | January 31, 2007

Which major-party presidential contender, aside from Ron Paul, is forthrightly against the war on drugs? FreedomDemocrats has the answer, which probably won't surprise you.

Comments

Christopher Monnier|1.31.07 @ 2:57PM|#

Paul/Kucinich in '08!

|1.31.07 @ 2:59PM|#

Reminds me, apparently Mr. Kucinich has been appointed chair of the of the Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the House Government Reform Committee, giving him jurisdiction over the ONDCP. Hopefully it will be a thing of beauty.
Via StopTheDrugWar.org

Devin McCullen|1.31.07 @ 2:59PM|#

Just curious, is anyone going to comment on this piece by Mark Kleiman on a better drug policy?

http://www.the-american-interest.com/ai2/article.cfm?Id=224&MId=7

While it doesn't go as far as most libertarians would, it would be a LOT better than the current method. I would be curious to hear a counter-argument.

tros|1.31.07 @ 3:07PM|#

Fucking BEAUTIFUL! I am now officially a Drug War Democrat. Hopefully Kucinich can spread the meme enough to make it a viable issue for Obama.

|1.31.07 @ 3:41PM|#

Paul/Kucinich '08 for real! They could make Cassandra their official mascot!

Warren|1.31.07 @ 4:01PM|#

Just curious, is anyone going to comment on this piece by Mark Kleiman on a better drug policy?

Sure. All of Mark's ideas are stupid.

|1.31.07 @ 4:48PM|#

The guy's ideas are internally inconsistent and doomed to failure.

He wants to stop going after drug users. Great. But he also wants to crack down on flagrant illicit markets, which means that the stuff will still be illegal.

He wants to end th eminimum drinking age. Great. he wants to impose a minimum drug using age. Oh, is there something magical about illicit narcotics that means that a minimum toking age will not cause the same problems a minimum drinking age will?

The problem here is that you have a victimless "crime". These "crimes" require the police to attack non-police to sniff them out. They encourage violence amongst the providers since the law enforcement tends to catch non-violent providers more easily than violent ones.

And, of course, he wants to engage in social engineering, and use violence when people do not bend perfectly to his vision.

Substitute the word "video games" for "drugs" in his essay, and the inanity of his ideas kind of jumps out.

Pat|1.31.07 @ 5:00PM|#

Last week I put a permanent item high on the side board of my LeftIndependent blog simply stating that Kucinich is the only Democratic presidential candidate who opposes the drug war. I will add Ron Paul, as the only Republican, as soon as I find a picture of Paul that does what I want of it.

Folks with an interest in drug policy reform and who have web sites or blogs might want to do something similar. When enough people see that these alternatives do exist they will start fighting for the issue more.

Yes. Dennis Kucinich is the chair newly created Domestic Policy Subcommittee of the all powerful Government Reform Committee. And the Domestic Policy Committee does have jurisdiction over the ONDCP.

Kucinich has a blog, http://kucinich.us/ that I have tried to start a conversation on under the announcement for the committee appointment. "Kucinich, Chair of Subcommittee with Broadest Oversight Authority in Federal Government" Comments link http://kucinich.us/node/2085#comment

|1.31.07 @ 5:20PM|#

As a Cleveland Resident, and employee of LTV Steel as it slid inexorably into Chapter 7 bankrupcy, I can firmly state that anyone who wants Kucinich to be president is either crazy or ignorant of the man's actual beliefs.

He is a syndacalist (although he does not realize this), and he would either create a Zimbabwe style meltdown or impose a Mussolini style corporatist state (if the big business leaders managed to achieve regulatory capture).

His position on the Iraq war and the drug war arise from the way in which they interfere with his vision for violently reworking society, not because he is some believer in allowing people to live their lives in peace.

Pat|1.31.07 @ 5:40PM|#

After visiting this thread earlier I decided it would be good to increase the blogosphere buzz about anti drug war candidates since we are going into a Democratic Party winter meeting weekend. any Democrat directed commentary is going to get greater play going forward into the weekend.

So I posted Kucinich drug war position on my blog.

Democrat Kucinich stands alone against Jim Crow Drug War

Chris Peterson|1.31.07 @ 6:22PM|#

A Paul/Democrat "mixed" ticket would be an interesting strategy. I know many San Francisco liberals who like Paul's strong anti-war message, but who would "never vote for a Republican". If Paul's VP (who has little power, anyways) was a Democrat, his ticket would have bipartisan appeal.

gopac|1.31.07 @ 7:13PM|#

Yeah then that little vegan freak would be a heartbeat away from being President.

On the up side he would take care of those space-based mind control weapons:)

If I was one of those "wingnut fundies" I would be praying 5 times a day Kucinich gets the Democrat nomination.

Pat|1.31.07 @ 7:27PM|#

I prefer to concentrate on the political aspects. Neither of these men has a shits chance in a sewer of getting the presidency. But their campaigns can be an effective platform for drug policy reform if enough people make noise about them.

I have pushed the thought, for years now, that the one policy that is common among the Greens, the Libertarians and the Nader Independents is their opposition to the drug war. It is the issue that has alienated from the two dominance parties millions of Americans from across the political spectrum. Dedicated people politically motivated enough act for their issues by leaving the two party system. The party that adopts a drug policy reform platform WINS many of these patriotic voters back into the fold and to their candidates. If we can show the two parties, not necessarily a common front but more a gathering single-minded mob, they will start to pay attention to the drug policy reform issue.

A common voice on a single issue to give that issue political critical mass.

Many third party folks are too ideologically pure for such ideas to fester and grow. Many not all.

|1.31.07 @ 8:56PM|#

So pat,

What if we do get a president who ends the drug war, but starts nationalizing heavy industry, agriculture and transportation? If Kucinich became president, expecially in this era of the imperial presidency, I and alot of other opponents to the drug war will start pining for the "good old days" of the Bush presidency.

Remember, Mckinley brought in Teddy Roosevelt who was thought by many Republicans to be a dangerous nut, to be his running mate in order to garner short-term political benefit for an election. As a result, that psychotic not only became president, but set in motion all the fucking power grabs of the 20th century by the Federal government.

In the long term, the farther guys like Kucinich are kept from the levers of power, the better.

Paul|1.31.07 @ 9:16PM|#

The...drug...war...is...here...to...stay... Let's move on.

|1.31.07 @ 9:17PM|#

Who's Ron Paul?

|1.31.07 @ 9:56PM|#

Your worst nightmare.

You're the disease, and he's the cure.

He wasn't the obgyn who delivered you; he hasn't dropped a single baby on its head.

He uses big complicated words, so don't worry your pretty little head about him.

Don't worry, according to the New York times and Fox News, he doesn't exist!

Sorry - I just couldn't resist.... ;)

Pete Guither|1.31.07 @ 10:02PM|#

There is absolutely no way that either Kucinich or Paul could win, so there's no reason to worry about anything they might actually get around to doing in office. But having them as candidates allows for the very real possibility that the drug war can be a national topic of conversation -- maybe even in the debates. And that would be a good thing.

|1.31.07 @ 11:37PM|#

I live in Lake jackso, and I would really liek to see RP win it, but looking over his wikipedia page, he's done alot of unpopular things in the name of libertarianism. he doesn't stand a chance...if only it were '88 again..

Pat|2.1.07 @ 7:43AM|#

TO: tarran | January 31, 2007, 8:56pm

"In the long term, the farther guys like Kucinich are kept from the levers of power, the better."

I would be more inclined to say that about you.

Pete Guither sums it up nicely.

Politics is a bigger game than your self-ghettoizing ideological purity.

Drug policy reform efforts have a lot of real opportunity with Kucinich as chair of this new committee. Even more opportunity with Kucinich and Paul both running and both on our side of the war.

It is amazing how some folks here look for any excuse to dismiss and denounce politicians who openly take your interests and political issues to heart.