digg

Facebook Connect Join Digg About

White House Czar Declares End to 'War on Drugs'

online.wsj.com — The Obama administration's new drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting "a war on drugs," a move that would underscore a shift favoring treatment over incarceration. In his first interview since being confirmed to head the White House ONDCP, Gil Kerlikowske said the bellicose analogy was a barrier to dealing with abuse.

Who dugg this? Made popular May 14, 2009

Digg DudeWhat is Digg?

Digg is a place for people to discover and share content from anywhere on the web. Digg surfaces the best stuff as submitted and voted on by the community. Take the Tour to learn more.

508 Comments

show profanity settings
expand all
  • mildlyEccentric, on 05/14/2009, -14/+389Finally!
  • CopsSayLegalize, on 05/14/2009, -15/+358Certainly, the real way to end the "war on drugs" and all its disastrous harms would be to legalize and regulate all drugs, just as this group of cops, judges and prosecutors are calling for: http://www.CopsSayLegalizeDrugs.com
  • fontez1, on 05/14/2009, -2/+285I'd love to see a poll on America's reaction to this. I bet a lot of people are as fed up as I am by the fact that we threw $1 trillion at this problem since the Nixon administration and drugs are as available and prevalent as they have ever been.
  • kezia1, on 05/14/2009, -6/+244Nice move, America.

    -Canada
  • wafflesomd, on 05/14/2009, -13/+198Why do I feel nothings going to change.
  • novenator, on 05/14/2009, -4/+166America needs to shift its attitude about having a war on many things. This terminology creates an artificially simplistic mindset that can never truly address an issue.
  • blindhammer, on 05/14/2009, -5/+138My friends, don't buy into this! We can win the war on drugs just like we've won the war on poverty, crime and Lindsay Lohan.
  • CivicTV, on 08/14/2009, -3/+113Whats the deal with Canadian Bacon?

    - America
  • PooGod, on 05/14/2009, -2/+103This would be amazing. Hopefully a small step in the right direction
  • jasonbalmforth, on 05/14/2009, -2/+98Call me cynical but I suspect this is just a bone being thrown to placate the legalization crowd. Beaucratic resistance and prison/law enforcement lobbying will eventually stymie any trend towards dismantling the huge anti drug interests in the US.

    In the meantime you'll get encouraging noises and a sincere seeming investigation into the drug problem that will last several years with but with the outcome a foregone conclusion. The verdict will be that they looked at all the options and they really tried, but it would seem that the way we've been doing things really is the best way forward. The status quo will be maintained and public anger will have been defused.

    I hope I'm wrong, but there's so much money at stake for special interest groups and such a large number of make-work jobs with a vested interest in maintaining our current insanity, that I'm very skeptical that this isn't just good public relations over an issue that's been gathering traction over the last few years.
  • bcronos, on 05/14/2009, -5/+94The drug war is over - the drugs won...
  • defenswens26, on 05/14/2009, -0/+79I've never done any drugs. But it's about ***** time, this whole thing is a waste of money. And those above the influence ads? They describe the actions of a drunk person more than somebody who got high.
  • slickmick, on 05/14/2009, -2/+76Sorry to be cynical, but...

    the first Bush said, 'Read my lips, no new taxes'
    Clinton said 'the era of big government is over"
    the second Bush said "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction"

    I'll believe the War on Drugs is over when I see it.
  • 7yler, on 05/14/2009, -2/+73This makes me very very happy.
  • inactive, on 05/14/2009, -0/+57wanna fight about it?
  • maz2331, on 05/14/2009, -5/+61Legalize or STFU.
  • inactive, on 05/14/2009, -3/+57Hey, that's a good move.

    Although calling the guy a drug "czar" doesn't instill much confidence that this is more than just a label change.
  • directedition, on 05/14/2009, -0/+54I don't know, after reading it, it seems more like a PR name change than an actual change in policies. The only only thing specific they said that seems substantial to me is: "The administration also said federal authorities would no longer raid medical-marijuana dispensaries in the 13 states where voters have made medical marijuana legal."

    I wonder if they'll drop the charges on the dispensary employees they've already arrested.
  • directedition, on 05/14/2009, -0/+53Clearly we need to start a war on war nomenclature.
  • teddylj, on 05/14/2009, -0/+52Enough talk. Everyday, non-violent offenders are being put in crowded jails and their lives are being ruined.

  • dn11, on 05/14/2009, -1/+50more prevalent and more available due to the over medication of prescription drugs that kids and teenagers can get easy access to. the government has been waging a war on certain drugs - while the drug companies have waged a more subtle war to push their products onto the public whether they need them or not.
  • lemur, on 05/14/2009, -13/+62I hope they declare war on drug COMPANIES
  • chewbakalol, on 05/14/2009, -5/+53Is this for real? Seriously? I just got butterflies in my stomach.
  • kezia1, on 05/14/2009, -1/+49It's delicious?
  • directedition, on 05/14/2009, -4/+51Canada, please bring back Stargate SG-1.

    - America
  • toxicshok, on 05/14/2009, -2/+48I think you need to get on the drugs.
  • jbob2000, on 05/14/2009, -11/+57It's just a rebranding. They'll end the war on drugs, but start the war on addictions.
  • GrammerPants, on 05/14/2009, -2/+48Care to show some calculations on that?
  • jeffiek, on 05/14/2009, -1/+46"drug czar says he wants to banish the idea that the U.S. is fighting "a war on drugs," "

    Relax folks. It's the idea that's going away. The war itself remains.
  • Ebacherville, on 05/14/2009, -2/+46can you say DOUBLE SPEAK.. say one thing like were ending the war on drugs, and then don't end the war on drugs, and do the same crap they have been doing.

    Wake up people.. there not ending the war on drugs...

    I hope to hell they are going to follow through with this, but HIGHLY doubt it.

    If they are ending the war on drugs i think ill become a hemp farmer.. you used to be able to pay your property taxes with hemp in this country.. Ironic aint it
  • UBERMAN5000, on 05/14/2009, -3/+46Misleading title...
    This doesn't change anything...yet
  • scubachef11, on 05/14/2009, -2/+43Thanks, Canada. Our next step is bagging our milk.

    - America
  • snapcase, on 05/14/2009, -3/+43That's common sense creeping in. Don't worry, it should pass in time.
  • noangelcame, on 05/14/2009, -0/+39I want to get excited,.. but not just yet! I'm waiting this one out a little longer, to see if they pull any fast ones on us. If a few weeks go by,. and he's still around saying this stuff,. then I'll do cartwheels in the street.
  • fyngyrz, on 05/14/2009, -1/+40Before they get anywhere useful, they're going to have to come up with a rational definition of "abuse"; that's the key problem here. Not the term "war on drugs."

    People making personal and consensual choices that do no harm (other than legal violation) are not "abusing" drugs.

    The government is abusing *them*.

    If the government wants to discourage drug use, the appropriate path is education WRT facts. This is not an area they have a great deal of experience in, however. They lie like dogs; by instinct, and with great conviction.
  • SpeedSteamBoat, on 05/14/2009, -1/+40I think you probably mean you've never done any ILLEGAL drugs. It's a rare person who has never had caffeine, cough medicine, or any number of prescription medications. I think it's important that we stop playing favorites with drugs on these kinds of false pretenses and instead assess all drugs for what they really are. Substances with certain psychoactive and physiological effects and risks when used. The labeling of certain drugs as illicit, often based on bad or falsified information, is one of the biggest ways the drug war has hurt us. People begin to form unjustified prejudices in their minds, and suddenly we are trapped in a nearly century long battle where progress is paralyzed by our inability to hold an honest, objective conversation with one another.
  • AdmiralJimbob, on 05/14/2009, -2/+40[comment removed by Diversity Enforcement Department thought police]

    - Britain
  • CivicTV, on 08/14/2009, -1/+39I for one welcome our new drug overlords?
  • geneayres, on 05/14/2009, -1/+36Marijuana use goes back to Confucius and the earliest religious rituals. It has had medical uses since time immemorial. Religious conservatives tried to stamp it out along with folk medicine and burned all medical practitioners who weren't priests (who believed only in blood-letting, appropriately enough) in the Dark and Middle Ages. It has been repeatedly proven beneficial in multiple ways, most recently by the AMA. And yet the ideologues continue to suppress it on spurious grounds, calling it a "drug" when legal pharmaceuticals, alcohol, and especially tobacco, are far worse in their effects, cost to society, and impact. This hypocrisy won't end soon. But the appointment of Kerlikowsky is a start.
  • snapcase, on 05/14/2009, -1/+36That's a wee bit overly optimistic... but yes it would help tremendously with the national debt and economy at large.
  • deathandtaverns, on 05/14/2009, -0/+34it's ham
  • apena89, on 05/14/2009, -1/+33It's sunny outside. Thank god I have this awesome hat.

    -America
  • yocouchdigga, on 05/14/2009, -2/+32the fact that we've let this ***** go on for as long as it has, is absolutely insane to me.
  • inactive, on 05/14/2009, -6/+36War on sobriety.
  • Akairenn, on 05/14/2009, -0/+30We're now simply going to have an occupation on drugs, followed by a surge on drugs, and then a 'one of these days, we'll bring the troops home from drugs, but we can't risk destabilizing the country'.
  • SpykerSpeed, on 05/14/2009, -0/+29I'll believe it when I see it.
  • pixburgher, on 05/14/2009, -2/+31This shouldn't be so difficult for you. If an English speaker says "America," they're referring to the country. If they say "The Americas" or "North (South/Central) America," then they're referring to the continent.

    Only somebody who's deliberately trying to be misunderstood or simply wants to be a pest would phrase it as you do. Try instead "You do realize that Canada is part of the Americas, right?"
  • Atmandk, on 05/14/2009, -1/+29Well, the very symbolism of these statements by the "drug czar" (an inappropriate title itself) are incredibly important. True, there needs to be substantive policy changes, but even making uttering these words is a major step. I never thought I'd hear these kinds of things coming from federal officials.
  • GoKings, on 05/14/2009, -5/+33Yeah... I remember when they also said that they would stop doing raids on medical marijuana facilities. Then two days later they raided a medical marijuana facility and arrested the owner. I'll believe it when I see it.
  • Syric, on 05/14/2009, -2/+29Okay, you don't like President Obama. Big whoop. But honestly that didn't even make any sense.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 100 of 523 discussions

  • Add a Comment

    Login or register to comment!
    Or, sign-in super fast with your Facebook account ...


© Digg Inc. 2009 — Content created and posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain | Terms of Use Updated | Privacy Policy
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.