posted March 01, 2005 01:02 PM            

His natural urge to protect his privacy evokes sympathy, however quaint his expectations might be at this point in our political history. But in justifying his refusal to talk about his foolish youth, he appealed to a higher purpose. "I wouldn't answer the marijuana questions," he told Wead. "You know why? Because I don't want some little kid doing what I tried."

For many American parents of a certain age, that self-serving yet poignant response must strike an empathetic chord. Concern that children will mimic parental misbehaviour is universal, and so is the impulse to conceal embarrassing truths. Bush rightly worries that children imitate adult models in the belief that they, too, can escape the consequences.

When Bush uttered those words, he was in his second term as governor of Texas and on his way to the White House. After all, if he could drink too much, smoke those forbidden herbs and perhaps even snort illegal powders and nevertheless become a successful politician, then "some little kid" might reasonably assume he or she could sin likewise without undue risk.

Any such assumption would be terribly mistaken, of course, unless the kid happened to belong to a wealthy and well-connected family like the Bush clan.

Prisons and jails across America are crowded with non-violent drug offenders whose lives have been ruined — and whose families have been damaged or destroyed — by the same punitive legal system that never touched young "Georgie," except to issue him a drunk-driving summons.

The poor and the black are incarcerated for using pot and coke, while the rich and the white lie to their kids (and occasionally to the voters) about those same transgressions.

Certainly that was how the justice system worked when Bush and Wead had their candid chats. The Texas politician couldn't reassure his friend that he hadn't used cocaine, let alone marijuana, but as governor he was imprisoning young people unlucky enough to be arrested in possession of those narcotics, often for draconian mandatory-minimum sentences. He always cherished his image as a tough, swaggering, law-and-order politician who didn't hesitate to imprison teenagers. But that isn't what happens to people from good families.

His niece Noelle Bush went through a drug-rehab program and was released two years ago. His friend Rush Limbaugh went through rehab and has returned to berating the less fortunate on the radio, without doing one day of time.

The lopsided cruelty has only escalated since Bush entered the White House. Federal agents have cracked down on medical users of marijuana, depriving them of a substance that eases their sickness and keeps them alive.

The human and economic costs of the drug war continue to swell. So burdensome are those costs that many conservatives, including such Bush tutors as former secretary of state George Shultz, have publicly pleaded for saner policies.

Despite his claims to be a "compassionate conservative," Bush has ignored those pleas. He seems to feel that if he overcame his substance-abuse problem, then nobody else really has an excuse.

No reporter ever asked the Texas governor why all those other people deserved to serve five or 10 or 20 years in prison, when their crimes were no different from what everyone knew he had done, whether he admitted it or not.

No reporter will ask the president that question today, either, although it is just as pertinent in light of his revealing conversations with Wead.

Indeed, Bush not only avoided public responsibility for his own past mistakes but found a clever way to turn those wayward years to political advantage. He brandishes his late return to sobriety as a symbol of his Christian faith.

It is hard to tell what Bush learned in his recovery from sin, except that other people got caught and he didn't.

posted March 01, 2005 10:16 PM              

bush jr. without.....

posted March 02, 2005 12:06 AM            

Just goind to jail for "using"...

Now has anyone ever looked at the life of a true addict? Let's take a real close look at how they steal, kill and then deal for drugs.

Do you think this is nothing more than a crime that one inflicts on oneself? Have you ever been ROBBED or BURGLERIZED by a junkie? Has a junkie ever stolen from your college fund, your purse or that which belongs to a loved one?

It is NOT just a crime against oneself. Murder, robbery (Armed robbery of not just a person but a store, car-jacking..etc) these are crimes commited so that one can gain money or property for the sole purpose of procuring drugs.

How do I know this...well, my dad was a special agent sup for the dept of justice- Bureau of Narcotics Enforcement.

Everyday he went to work to get these people off the streets. He DID NOT look at color, but what he did see was children of crack addicts, heroin dealers..etc suffer because mommy and daddy had to steal for drugs, sell drugs for their own habits..or worse- SELL their CHILDREN for drugs.

This article is doing nothing more than making it look like a crime against the races. As if the poor minority drug users are witless and innocent for just hurting themselves.

posted March 02, 2005 03:49 PM            

I think you have a great point. We need to address those addicition issues, but we also cannot let the crime go unpunished.

There should be a tier system (which there is one in place right now, but that doesn't get the media spotlight. Instead people would rather highlight that Bush got caught once and is evil, whereas the celebrities are "just under pressure" and minorities are "just poor and trying to escape their way of life".

We do have a system that deals with the addiction first, tries to get people into rehab, but that is only for the 1st and 2nd time. Repeat offenders will end up going to jail forever..not just because they are "poor" as Rainbow is trying to insinuate and because the "rich" get off (Let's look at the wealthy Robert Downey Jr. who served time and Tom Sizemore who may end up with a life sentance for his repeat use to meth).

When one is busted for using Heroin we have to look at the "whole". The person that was busted may have gotten caught while driving a stolen vehicle in which he procured by shooting the drive in the head. Does the media focus on that? Nope...just that he is a poor black man that was caught twice for possession.

After we look at the entire situation, then we need to address the individual counts. Treat the drug habit, get the person clean. If it is the first time, require NA meetings and frequent pee tests.

Second time, more extensive program (in house) and now assign a drug counselor.

Third time- how long do we keep doing this? How did the person procure the drugs? Their job? Stolen money or merchandise?

If any of the drug violations also included a violent crime then not only is the habit addressed but the person STILL NEEDS to do TIME.

There is no excuse...

Hell, some idiot here keeps bashing Mrs Bush for her accident while NOT under the influence and so many here railed against the 1st lady. Then why are people thinking it is okay for minorities to get high, get caught with narcotics and not have to pay a price?

posted March 05, 2005 01:31 PM            

Simple possession of a user weight of narcotics..to my knowledge...doesn't get one sentenced to 10-15 years. Possession of a kilo of coke or herion or multiple pounds of grass is dealer weight and 10-15 years in prison isn't nearly enough.

Why should someone who commits a felony to get money to support their drug habit be immune from prosecution for the underlying felony?

How about these 4 Canadian police officers who were killed by drug dealers during a raid. Should these killers be patted on the back and set free...or prosecuted for murder..and executed?

posted March 05, 2005 02:50 PM            

People do not go to jail for life for simple possession- it is possession with the intent to distribute or commiting a felony while under the influence, or in possession of narcotics.

You are right in that there has to be more than a certain amount present on the suspect.

What people DON'T understand is that whether you are white or black- if you get caught with a large quantity it all means the same.

Now..for the sake of educating some people on WHY certain minorities are in jail over others.

Does anyone here have friends..loved ones..etc.. that are Narcotics agents? If you do ask them 'What ethnic group transports / sells the large quantities of Heroin, marijuana, meth, crack".

My father worked as a Narcotics agent for most of my life- he specialized in apprehending Heroin Kingpins and large assualt weapons sales with various gangs.

His unit- the guys he supervised were ALL...HISPANIC.. he would not let any white or black officer work his unit. Not because he discriminated against them, but Heroin is exclusively run by Hispanic cartels and dealers. My dad busted the deal before it went to the streets via gangs.

The smaller packets / balloons of Heroin for sniffing or snorting would go through another hispanic dealer before being cut and sent through neighborhood dealers- almost all of the consumption of snortable Heroin is done by whites.

Meth- not a minority thing- actually it is mostly white and those dealers, manufacturers are also being busted as quick as they set up shop. Again, if they just get busted with enough to "use" they are not just locked away - if they get busted with enough for "the intent to distribute" then they are put away for a lot longer of a time period..regardless of color..should they get caught 3 times in some states..they are DONE..

Weed...mostly a black dealer thing. At my dad's retirement they had an almost exclusively black officer table dedicated to apprehending large quantity dealers of pot. Why? Is it racial..well listening to them talk the one SAS said "Special Agent Dad once told me that he couldn't let me on his team, I thought he was being a &%*#*#^ until I realized he did it to save my life. Now, I see what he means as I will only allow certain ethnic groups on my team as they assimulate better in that culture / environment".

SO, if the cops / DEA / DOJ is doing this- do you think it is for a reason?

Do some white people get off? Yep, usually the ones with small quantities and good lawyers. I can bet you money though, had Bush been caught with a couple of kilos of coke, a scale and baggies, he would not have had a chance to be where he is today.