Waters Calls for McCaffrey Resignation 

  Waters Calls for McCaffrey Resignation 

Posted by FoM on August 15, 2000 at 20:36:05 PT
Shadow Conventions: News Release 
Source: U.S. Newswire  

Just eight blocks away from the Democratic National Convention, Rep. Maxine Waters called for the resignation of Drug Czar Barry McCaffrey. Rep. Waters (D Los Angeles) is the former head of the Congressional Black Caucus and one of the country's most powerful African American leaders. Waters was followed by Rep. Charlie Rangel (D New York), who like Jesse Jackson was once a strong supporter of stiffer penalties for drug use. 
Rangel voiced concerns about the drug war in a way that was, according to program organizers, much more public and dramatic than were his past statements. Rangel is the ranking Democrat on the powerful Ways and Means Committee. Rangel said he spoke with the President before Rangel went to Cuba and asked, "What happens if I ask them about their political prisoners and they ask me about ours?" Rangel said many non-violent prisoners are political prisoners because drug laws disproportionately impact poor people and minorities. The bipartisan group of elected officials who called for major overhaul of drug laws, including Rep. John Conyers (D Detroit), Rep. Tom Campbell (R Los Angeles), California State Senator Tom Hayden (D Los Angeles), and New Mexico Republican Governor Gary Johnson. In addition, Jesse Jackson, Ethan Nadelman, Susan Sarandon, and Tim Robbins spoke. John Conyers ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, echoed Waters and Rangel. Conyers said, "I would call on Gen. McCaffrey to resign, but then they'd appoint someone just as bad who I would have to ask to resign too." Rep. Tom Campbell (R San Jose) launched into a blistering attack on the $1.3 billion military aid package the U.S. will spend spraying herbicides and fighting rebels in Colombia. "The problem is that if politicians question this war on drugs," Campbell said, "they risk being called soft on drugs. I'm not scared to have any label put on me because America's greatness lies in individual responsibility and freedom -- not in blaming other countries for our problems." Governor Johnson denounced America's war on drugs for putting more people in prison than any other country except Russia. The Republican Governor of New Mexico Gary Johnson and the Democratic mayor of Salt Lake City Rocky Anderson cited the lack of political courage as the reason for the continuation of the drug war. "The Republican and Democratic Parties will not address the absolute insanity of our approach to fighting drug abuse and addiction. It is up to the American people to insist on a course that is honest, effective and just," Anderson said. "It is up to us because the politicians do not have the courage or integrity to lead as we intended them to lead." The Mayor said Salt Lake County drug overdoses are the number one cause of death among men 25 to 40 -- reason enough, according to Anderson, to question the efficacy of "just say no" educational programs like DARE. The Mayor made headlines earlier this year when he replaced DARE, which the research has shown to be ineffective, with after-school and summer curricular opportunities for youth. Gov. Johnson of New Mexico said he does not use drugs or alcohol -- but that he wants them to stay legal. "I want to make a pitch to you to not drink alcohol," the Governor said. I want to tell you to stop drinking -- but do I think it should be criminal to drink alcohol? No. It should be illegal to drink and drive. It should be illegal to be drunk and cause harm to someone else. But drug prohibition like alcohol prohibition, and it is tearing this country apart." Ethan Nadelmann, the Executive Director of the Lindesmith Center, which organized the drug policy sessions, said: "Reforming our drug laws has emerged as a powerful new movement for political and social justice in the U.S. Political leaders are gaining the courage to speak out for drug laws based on common sense, science, public health and human rights." On a lighter note comedian Al Franken played his famous "Saturday Night Live" Stuart Smalley -- who in turn pretended to be an L.A. police officer. "I'm a police officer, I have a hard job, and sometimes I make mistakes. But that's okay, because I'm good enough, smart enough, and gosh darn it, some people like me." Los Angeles, Aug. 15 /U.S. Newswire -- The above was released today by The Shadow Conventions: Shadow Conventions: Rep. Maxine Waters Calls For Resignation Of Drug Czar General Barry McCaffrey Copyright 2000, U.S. Newswire Related Articles & Web Sites:The Shadow Conventions Convention 2000 News Board MapInc. Articles On The Shadow Conventions: CannabisNews Articles On The Shadow Conventions: 

Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help


Comment #7 posted by kaptinemo on August 16, 2000 at 12:22:46 PT:

Many thanks, Observer

I had heard Rangel artfully spin his blather on various talking head shows, before. Like any debater who knows from the start that he has a fundamentally indefensible position, he expended more effort in belligerant posturing than in debating the actual points. But the fact, as Szasz noted, that he would stoop to an easily disproved falsehood is just indicative of the whole DrugWarrior mindset: win at all costs. Lie. Cheat, Steal. Kill, even. (Remember Esequiel Hernandez, Mario Paz, David Scott, Peter McWilliams, Ismael Mena, and all those who were sacrificed on their Drug Free America altar!).And these clot-brains get up and mewl about *us* giving the 'wrong impression' and sending the 'wrong messages'.Pathetic. Truly pathetic.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #6 posted by observer on August 16, 2000 at 10:18:56 PT


Here's what Szasz wrote about Rangel in 1992. Hopefully Charles Rangel will begin to undo the damage he's done...Congressman Charles B. RangelOstensibly opposing the legalizers, whom they accuse of being "soft on drugs," are the prohibitionists who pledge to stamp out the "drug plague." Congressman Charles B. Rangel, Democrat of New York and chairman of the House Select Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Control, is an exemplary drug prohibitionist. He owes much of his public visibility to his demagogic posturings against drugs. As a professional anti-drug crusader, Congressman Rangel has good reasons to fear a drug peace replacing his beloved War on Drugs. Still, as a prominent black lawmaker, one might expect him to respect the distinction between lega and illegal objects and acts. After all, we now preach the sermon of the free market to the people of formerly communist nations. Against that background, consider Rangel's use of language:Just the thought of legalization brings up more problems and concerns than already exist.. .. Has anybody ever considered which narcotic and psychotropic drugs would be legalized?... What would the market price be and who would set it? Would private industry be allowed to have a stake in any of this?. Will the Government establish tax-supported facilities to sell these drugs?15 Congressman Rangel has populist support and power, and those are the things that count most in demagogic politics. Why should he know that in a market economy there is no "who" to set prices? But if Range does not understand this, or does not want to understand it, can we expect people who vote for him to understand it? Moreover, Rangel has access to the media, where he can explain to people that when the state does not prohibit a substance, then its use is, ipso facto, "sanctioned by the government" and this sends "the message that drugs are O.K." Rangel thus maintains that we should not criticize or debate drug prohibition, because doing so is fundamentally subversive. "If we really want to do something about drug abuse," he concludes, "let's end this nonsensical talk about legalization right now."16 Not for naught did Mark Twain opine that "there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress."17 Despite such warnings, William F. Buckley, Jr., invited Congressman Rangel to participate in a television debate on "whether the United States would be better off decriminalizing drugs."18 With great gusto, Range disposed of the question and his opponents by pointing out to the nationwide audience that the United States could not legalize drugs even if it wanted to, because "we are bound to honor our drug treaties." Buckley -- who acted (or pretended to act) as if his opponent were a debater, not a demagogue -- conceded that he was unfamiliar with any such treaty and queried, "Er, Congressman Rangel, what treaties are you referring to?" Unflappably, Rangel replied that "there were quite a few of them," offering "the Psychotropic Drug Treaty of 1987" as an example. That treaty, he patiently explained, "denies its signatories the right to market drugs except for the public health." After the debate was over, Buckley tells us, Rangel was munching a sandwich when a "guest accosted him. 'What about this Psychotropic Drug Treaty of 1987? I never heard of it.' Charles Rangel leaned his head back and laughed uproariously. 'He demanded a treaty, didn't he?'"19Actually. Rangel's memory was better than he realized. In 1988 at Vienna, under the auspices of the United Nations, the United States was indeed one of the signatories of a psychotropic drug treaty.20 The signing of international drug treaties is a ceremonial affair, however, with virtually no impact on actual policy.21 The fact that none of the debate panelists except Rangel seemed to know anything about drug treaties, and that Rangel himself thought he had invented a drug treaty when in fact he was citing a real one, is indicative of the level of public discourse on what is supposedly the most important domestic issue of the moment.Our Right To Drugs, Thomas Szasz, 1992, pp.101-103  
Charles Rangel articles (mapinc)
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #5 posted by dddd on August 16, 2000 at 08:27:42 PT


 That ol' boy Nemo brings up some good points....Rangels bell would seem to ring in step to the latest wrangler that resounds in response to the latest reactionary reminiscence that is recommended to retain rank and rapport. I used to like Rangel,but I think he has gone the way of most "ol' boy", politicians,and would now smooch the rump of anything,or one,that would maintain his popularity. It's like the same old story.These people start out with noble visions,and good intentions,but after many years of the rockstaresque lionization,and glory of being in power,they almost cant help but transmutate into shameful brown-nosed rascals,and scoundrels,who maintain their grip on the narcotic-like power,that drives them to lie,cheat,and pretend to be sincere,,the same principle ,and paralell to a crackhead,or junkie who hates to leave the niceties of their vice. I realize this is a somewhat radical,and farfetched comparison....................................So What..........dddd
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #4 posted by Rainbow on August 16, 2000 at 07:05:55 PT

Jesse Jackson

While driving home last night I listenned to Jesse Jackson's speech. He called for an end to the War on Drugs and mentioned the prison situation.I think jesse is going to back this cause and he is putting some influence on these folks.Jesse J. is an amazing person. He stood up at the DNC and said these things. Wow I like this guy and the influence he has.Still not a reason to vote for Algore unless he says the same thing and maybe provides a pardon or million. Maybe get rid of barry and he might have my vote.CheersRainbow
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on August 16, 2000 at 05:03:42 PT:

Rangel's wet finger, testing the wind

Career pols like Rangel have always fascinated me; how is it that they can, day after day, spout nonsense and not seem the least disturbed by it? Is it necessarily a prerequisite to be an actor *before* one becomes a pol?What fascinates me even more, however, is how people like Rangel can have the kind of 'sea change' that he is evidently having concerning the WoSD? No matter; he is doing exactly as has been predicted by many here. When the more intelligent of the pols realize the tide is turning, that their precious WoSD has made many more enemies than supporters amongst their respective constituents, (indeed, many of their constituents are in *jail* because of that 'support', and their families become more vocal about that fact) then they begin to contemplate turning their ideological coats. As Rangel is evidently doing. As much as you might find it personally disgusting to do so, it might be a good idea to encourage such hyenas to continue their process of trying to dye their spots. They are being very tenative right now; if they think no one is paying attention, they'll cut their losses and return to the DrugWar fold. But I would never trust such critters; Rangel's previous actions have proven what someone once told me about Doberman dogs: sooner or later, they will get too big for their britches and turn on their masters. You always have to watch 'em.
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #2 posted by dddd on August 15, 2000 at 23:31:23 PT


 Maxine Waters is a truly rare person.To bravely speak out,and say the things she said,I think she is the coolests! To use a strange bit of respectfully irreverent fun,I would say there's a big ol' set of balls swingin around beneath her skirt!......No one else has even come close to cuttin' thru the crap,and speaking out as directly as the honourable Ms. Waters has!...Thank You Maxine!We need way more real people like yourself representing reality.You are a rare,and true patriot.......dddd
[ Post Comment ]


Comment #1 posted by observer on August 15, 2000 at 21:40:30 PT

Difficult Admission

Rangel said he spoke with the President before Rangel went to Cuba and asked, "What happens if I ask them about their political prisoners and they ask me about ours?" angel said many non-violent prisoners are political prisoners because drug laws disproportionately impact poor people and minorities.Goodness ... this is a surprise! I did not know about Charles Rangel's recent opinions on the drug war. I can remember Rangel regularly bellowing out his refusal to consider legalization (and interrupting others who differed) on Firing Line, years ago. In the interim, he has been a lusty supporter for ratcheting away remaining traditional freedoms, in the name of "drugs" and, of course, "Our Children." In his book, Our Right to Drugs (1992), author Thomas Szasz devotes a section to Mr Rangel. Can't wait to hear what Rangel has to say these days. Admitting that drug-war prisoners really and truly are political prisoners must be a very hard admission for a (once) full-on drug warrior to make! Think of the implications of that admission.I wonder if Charles Rangel will be able to undo some of the damage he has done to the rights of all Americans? I hope so. That would send out the best "message to Our Children,' of all. 
[ Post Comment ]

  Post Comment

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

Link URL: 
Link Title: