Cannabis News Protecting Patients Access to Medical Marijuana
  Money for Programs That Increase Drug Use?
Posted by CN Staff on February 12, 2007 at 10:30:30 PT
Transcript: Tucker Carlson 
Source: MSNBC 

cannabis USA: Thank you all very much. We are sadly out of time. I appreciate it. With the national deficit in the trillions, President Bush is asking for a 31 percent increase for an anti-drug campaign that one government study suggests actually increases pot smoking among teenagers. Yesterday I spoke with Republican Congressman Mark Souder of Indiana. He‘s a supporter of the program. And I began by asking why the president would want to put 130 million more into advertising that may do exactly the opposite of what it intends to do.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP: http://tinyurl.com/yo2s7a

REP. MARK SOUDER ®, INDIANA: Prevention programs are very hard to measure. This particular study, which I would argue isn‘t a bipartisan study, is several years old, not good tracking methods. In fact, the ad campaign has been reduced, which reduced some of its effectiveness. The president is proposing to put it up, still 20 million short of where it was, even if you don‘t allow for time adjusted dollars.

But here‘s the fact, drug use among youth has dropped, Marijuana use has dropped. We only have two prevention programs in this country that are directed right at young people, this program and Drug Free Schools. If it‘s drops and these programs are there, pus law enforcement, it would suggest, in fact, they are working, regardless of what one opinionated study shows.

CARLSON: Well, but wait, you are arguing two things simultaneously. One is that there‘s no way to measure whether it‘s working, and secondly, that the study is opinionated and inaccurate. The study says that, in fact, these ads, the anti-Marijuana ads, convinced teenagers that everyone was smoking pot, so they went ahead and smoked it. People who watch the ad, the studies, the GAO study says were more likely to smoke pot. If there‘s no evidence that the ad is effective, and indeed there is evidence that is counter-productive, why keep going with these ads? In other words, it seems kind of faith based, a little bit.

SOUDER: Well normally the pro-Marijuana groups argue that all I am is a drug lawyer, and I want to lock everyone up. We only have two prevention programs. Prevention is much harder to measure, I grant that. But the fact is, I believe in results and conservatives believe in results. And the results are combined programs, prevention, treatment, interdiction, eradication and law enforcement, have reduced drug use.

That‘s the result, not some poll. By the way, a similar study showed in teen pregnancy that supposed pregnancy prevention programs increased teen pregnancy use. Just because some study comes up to some conclusion, that the liberals doing the study wanted to have, doesn‘t mean that the study is accurate. Results are results. Teen pregnancy is dropping and drug use is dropping.

CARLSON: OK, but Congressman two things, one, I‘m not arguing against drug prevention programs. I‘m only arguing against a specific series of ads that were not attacked by a liberal group. It wasn‘t Norml that did this study. It was the Government Accounting Office, and they spent 14 million dollars and spent five years studying these ads. Now, if you have some specific reason to believe this study was hijacked by liberals, state it, but I don‘t see any reason to believe that it was.

SOUDER: I have a specific reason to believe that the methods used in this study, at the request of people who are challenging this program, have been hijacked, and I believe that, in general, that every single prevention program, whether it be Drug Free Schools—GAO did a study questioning Drug Free Schools. CADCA (ph), the community action programs, they did a study questioning those.

The fact is the combination of prevention programs have resulted in a reduction. I want to see results, not some kind of touchy-feely thing with a few people giving a responses to a particular ad. They have no evidence. It‘s old data, not measured well, would never be used by a private business.

CARLSON: OK, how about the emphasis on Marijuana? Marijuana is not, obviously, the most dangerous drug out there. There‘s Crystal Meth. But there are also drugs that are genuinely popular with kids, that it‘s not clear anyone in Congress is eve aware of, prescription drugs, drugs you get from your parents, Zanex, Oxycotton, Valium, drugs like that. Why aren‘t there more government programs aimed at making those drugs unappealing to kids? Why Marijuana?

SOUDER: Marijuana is the primary gateway drug, although tobacco and alcohol, because they‘re all illegal for youth—You could argue that tobacco is a gateway drug to Marijuana. Smoking Marijuana is then a gateway drug to everything else. Furthermore, the THC content of BC bud, Quebec Gold, and this Marijuana that‘s currently on the streets isn‘t like the Cheech and Chong Marijuana. It‘s more like cocaine. But that aside --

CARLSON: Wait, hold on, I‘m sorry congressman. How is it more like Coke. I don‘t understand what you mean by that.

SOUDER: In other words, the THC of old ditch weed, and what was happening when I was in college in the late ‘60s and early ‘70s had a THC of four to eight percent, maybe as high as 12. Now we‘re looking at 20, 30, 40 percent, and the kick and addiction you get, the destruction in your brain cells, is more like Coke or Crack than it is like the old time Marijuana.

But, that said, I agree with your point. We should have been focused more on Meth. We should have been focused more on prescription drugs. Congress has sent this message over and over. I don‘t oppose Marijuana being in the national ad campaign, but I think it needs to be broader than Marijuana.

CARLSON: OK, and how many people died from Marijuana overdoses last year?

SOUDER: If you count the amount of crime associated with Marijuana --

CARLSON: No, no, just Marijuana, the drug itself, that you said is like Cocaine now, how many people died from it?

SOUDER: I don‘t know -- 65 percent of emergency room admissions for drug abuse are Marijuana.

CARLSON: Huh, OK, but did anyone die that you know of?

SOUDER: Presumably so, thousands have died. The only question is, you said overdose. That isn‘t even most of the deaths related to prescription drug, or to Cocaine or Heroine. There is a whole range of drug crimes, and so on. I don‘t know the number of overdose. Marijuana is often managed with Meth. No drug user is a single drug user. So Marijuana is often in the mix of most deaths. So, it would be very hard to separate what‘s what. A Marijuana is very seldom just a casual Marijuana user, except in the early stages. They‘re often going to poly-drug.

CARLSON: Yes, OK. I‘m not endorsing drugs, but I know a lot of casual Marijuana users. So, that‘s wrong, but I appreciate your coming on. Thanks a lot congressman.

SOUDER: Thank you Tucker.

Complete Transcript: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17115678/

Source: MSNBC (US Web)
Show: Tucker Carlson
Program Airdate: February 9, 2007
Copyright: 2007 MSNBC
Contact: letters@msnbc.com
Website: http://msnbc.com/news/

Related Articles & Web Site:

NORML
http://www.norml.org/

Does Bush Want Kids To Smoke Pot?
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22616.shtml

Bush Wants Funding Jump for Anti-Drug Ads
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22613.shtml

Transcript: Why Not Cash in on Marijuana Crops?
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22461.shtml

Researchers Say Pot Not Always Path To Drugs
http://cannabisnews.com/news/thread22432.shtml


Home    Comment    Email    Register    Recent Comments    Help

 
Comment #12 posted by akira- on February 14, 2007 at 16:17:57 PT:

LMAO
ahahaha, i watched that video and when Carlson said "Yes, OK. I‘m not endorsing drugs, but I know a lot of casual Marijuana users. So, that‘s wrong, but I appreciate your coming on. Thanks a lot congressman."... i lost it, LMAO ahahah.. thats so awesome, <3 Carlson :)

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #11 posted by Toker00 on February 13, 2007 at 09:24:41 PT
Teen Pregnancy Use
OMG. Teens are using Pregnancy in increasing numbers! Call the Pregnancy Enforcement Agency! Have them arrested and jailed for Pregancy use! Yeah. Doesn't make any better sense with Cannabis use, either.

Toke.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #10 posted by BGreen on February 13, 2007 at 06:21:32 PT
Teen Pregnancy Use? What the hell is that? LOL
That's the result, not some poll. By the way, a similar study showed in teen pregnancy that supposed pregnancy prevention programs increased teen pregnancy use.

Sometimes the best way to prove somebody is insane is to let them speak.

Mark Souder has spoken.

The Reverend Bud Green

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #9 posted by FoM on February 12, 2007 at 17:42:26 PT
Off Topic: News from Mexico
Mexican Lawmakers to Propose Drug Bill

**

Monday, February 12, 2007

Mexican lawmakers said Monday they will revive a watered-down version of a 2006 drug bill criticized by the United States because it would have effectively decriminalized possession of marijuana and other drugs.

The new measure, to be presented in a joint Senate committee Wednesday, drops the previous proposal for decriminalizing possession of small amounts for all drug "consumers."

It also reduces the amount of drugs that can be considered possession for personal use to a single dose.

"An error was made, unfortunately, in the lower house, adding the (exemption for) consumers," said Sen. Alejandro Gonzalez Alcocer, president of the Senate Judiciary committee.

The original bill passed Congress last year but was vetoed by then-President Vicente Fox, after Washington urged lawmakers "to review the legislation urgently, to avoid the perception that drug use would be tolerated in Mexico."

The new bill exempts only Indians who use traditional hallucinogens as part of their rituals, addicts who can prove they are undergoing treatment and first-time offenders.

Current laws exempt addicts or first offenders from prison sentences, but do not clearly define terms like "addict" or "personal-use" amounts. The new bill aims to clarify those distinctions, thus allowing police to focus mainly on dealers, rather than users.

The 2006 bill would have gone much further, exempting just about anyone from prosecution even for repeated possession of 5 grams of marijuana.

The new measure reduces that limit to 1 gram, or a single marijuana cigarette. First offenders would be subject to a fine, but could be prosecuted if caught a second time.

The legal definition of "personal use" amounts for other drugs like cocaine, heroin and methamphetamines would also be reduced to a "single dose" basis under the new proposal, senators said.

Copyright: 2007 Salem Web Network

http://www.townhall.com/News/NewsArticle.aspx?contentGUID=50582c93-a7cc-44fc-bf43-97bf16264bd6

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #8 posted by OverwhelmSam on February 12, 2007 at 17:07:58 PT
Souder
It's obvious that Souder's drug of choice is glutany. Lokk at that fat pig! So what's the difference if I sedate with marijuana, and Souder sedates with a Big Mac? I can't believe the good people of Fort Wayne Indiana still support this loser.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #7 posted by kaptinemo on February 12, 2007 at 15:57:10 PT:

Blood in the water
I can only hope that some Dems were also watching this and getting some ideas; Souder was 'meat on the table', and Carlson sliced off significant portion's of Souder's rump. And Carlson, a Repub mouthpiece if ever there was one, didn't have to break a sweat doing so.

Now imagine what someone like Dennis Kucinich could do with such an opportunity, unfettered and unconcerned about having to kow-tow to the Repubs?

ONDCP being raked over the bureaucratic coals, Souder made to look a fool, and now Dems have control of oversight of the premier anti-drug agency. Will wonders never cease?

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #6 posted by Toker00 on February 12, 2007 at 14:40:03 PT
Priceless.
CARLSON: Yes, OK. I‘m not endorsing drugs, but I know a lot of casual Marijuana users. So, that‘s wrong, but I appreciate your coming on. Thanks a lot congressman.

Coming from Tucker Carlson this is priceless. He just admitted on mainstreamamerica that he knows "lots" of casual cannabis users personally. Admitting they are not someone you would have to be ashamed of knowing. Admitting that even High Class Society has accepted Cannabis as a recreational drug. He threw Cannabis Prohibition back in the face of the MOST rabid Prohibian on Earth. And told him to his face that Cannabis is not Cocaine. Thanks Tuck.

Toke.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #5 posted by dongenero on February 12, 2007 at 13:25:21 PT
souder beat down
Well, that's the best thing I've heard from Tucker. Nice beat down on Souder.

John Stewart may have to give Tucker a little love before he works him over next time.

[ Post Comment ]

 
Comment #4 posted by HempWorld on February 12, 2007 at 11:23:18 PT
Mark Souder is stunningly ignorant and
dogmatically vilifies Marijuana. A perfect personification of the US Federal Drug War and its warriors, ignorant, uninformed and with a specific political agenda, sounds a bit like Iraq doesn't it?

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #3 posted by FoM on February 12, 2007 at 11:14:24 PT
Something About Tucker Carlson
http://deadnews.blogspot.com/2006/12/tucker-sees-dso.html

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #2 posted by FoM on February 12, 2007 at 11:04:39 PT
Sam
I like Tucker. He is proud to be known as a Deadhead. He has mentioned bongs and other things that give himself away. He did a good job.

[ Post Comment ]
 
Comment #1 posted by Sam Adams on February 12, 2007 at 11:00:35 PT
fantastic
I don't know much about Tucker Carlson, but he gets a big gold star for this performance. Subjecting Souder to a verbal beating on the drug war! Ow, that looked painful. Each successive hardball question must have left Souder reeling and wondering when it was going to end!

by the way - OF COURSE the GAO "investigates" anti-drug programs - they investigate EVERY government program, that's what accountants do, you nimrod.



[ Post Comment ]


  Post Comment
Name:        Password:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comment:   [Please refrain from using profanity in your message]

Link URL:
Link Title:


Return to Main Menu


So everyone may enjoy this service and to keep it running, here are some guidelines: NO spamming, NO commercial advertising, NO flamming, NO illegal activity, and NO sexually explicit materials. Lastly, we reserve the right to remove any message for any reason!

This web page and related elements are for informative purposes only and thus the use of any of this information is at your risk! We do not own nor are responsible for visitor comments. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 and The Berne Convention on Literary and Artistic Works, Article 10, news clippings on this site are made available without profit for research and educational purposes. Any trademarks, trade names, service marks, or service names used on this site are the property of their respective owners. Page updated on February 12, 2007 at 10:30:30