Thursday, June 24, 2010

The moronic ramblings of a drug warrior

In a recent episode of Stossel the war on drugs was being debated—Stossel is on the side of the angels in this one. There is a very interesting question from a young man in the audience. He asks the drug warrior, Paul Chabot, about the constitution and the war on drugs, at 2:55 minute spot. The young man notes that to make alcohol illegal the government needed a Constitutional amendment. Prohibition was passed, failed and repealed. So, he wants to know where the goverrnment gets its power to wage a war on drugs. Now I suspect legal scholars have concocted such an argument but it is a worthy question.

So how does the drug warrior answer it? He doesn't. He goes into some self-aggrandizing response about how he fought in Iraq and how the "surge" worked—which is why we have left Iraq, all the troops are home, and the country is a free, liberal, democracy. NOT! That aside, the question was about Constitutional authority. This smug drug warrior says "let me answer that this way" and then goes on to not answer it. He doesn't even try. Instead he tries to invoke the love of war and partiortism, the smell of napalm, which is an aphrodisiac for conservatives.

Chabot is a self-declared "conservative Republican" which means he has no concern for the Constitution at all. He campaigns using photos of himself in uniform from when he was in Iraq, a violation of military policy, but the law is for the little guys, not for conservative Republicans. And from what I could see his endorsement are mainly cops, drug warriors and other criminal gangs who assault the American public on a daily basis. Of course, someone so enamoured with the thug element would be a conservative Republican. His motto is: "Send a military and law enforcement veteran to fight for you in Sacramento." Me, I'd rather send him to Folsom.

Chabot seems to think that the only reason that people should vote for him is that he went to Iraq to kill people. I bet he routinely mentions Iraq in as many answers as possible, especially for questions where he has no idea what he's talking about. So, if you asked him about whether he was enjoying the sunny weather he'd say: "Well, let me answer it this way. In Iraq, where I served, it was sunny. It's sunny here as well. But the sun in America is American sun and better than the sun in Iraq, where I served in the military. In the military, when I was in Iraq, we would discuss the sun, and in Sacramento, if elected I will serve there just like I did when I was in the military in Iraq. Because, in the military in Iraq we serve, and we do that because that's what we do, in Iraq, when I was in the military."

Stossel did ask him a second time about the actual question, which Chabot ignored and Chabot ignored the question the second time as well. Stossel was too polite in letting it drop. He should have at least said, "So, in other words, you won't answer the question. In that case lets move on."

Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel, and Chabot is a scoundrel.