Congressman busted with Cocaine. Votes for drug testing food stamp recipients....

Granted the Ds and the Rs (center and the wings) are all just puppets, but the real question to ask is "why are there vice/morality laws"? I mean shouldn't he have been able to get a tweak on if he wanted? This is the land of liberty (aka free from gov't interference).

As for the assistance folks, who cares if they're hopped up?

If the drugs were decriminalized, you'd see a vast majority of the "ills" of the world go away. Mexican violence, extremist in 3rd world countries just would dry up w/o a way to fund themselves.

Derek

reply to post by DestroyDestroyDestroy

What you do with your money is your business. What you do with other people's money, however, is not. The system is in place to provide basic necessities to those suffering economic hardship, not to give them their fix of drugs.

You make a strong and valid point. Personally I think everyone who wants to ingest substances into their own bodies should be free do so, on their own dime of course. I have a family to feed, clothe and house and taking away a portion of that necessity money and forcing us to do without in order to subsidize another persons drug or partying or leisure habits fries me to the gills also.

But before I get fired up over that, there are more serious issues to address when it comes to my tax dollars, from my own perspective. I take greater issue and first address the billions in corporate welfare, and the billions spent blowing up little kids and civilians across the globe, in countries that do not threaten my fellow countrymen's way of life. I see these things as a much bigger problem, a bigger waste of money and I believe they take a higher toll on the human condition then Shayquana getting some free food and crack rock.

LL

silly sheeple people,

it's got nothing to do with hypocrisy

it's all about snagging a juicy contract for his friends drug testing corp.

how many millions of people on food-stamps again?

multiply by cost of drug tests = PROFITS


doubt it'll affect his career much;
this being in the same country that saw marion "crack 'n' ho's" barry reelected

Kinda like Republican Senator Mike Crapo who was arrested last year for drunk driving. He is a Morman, drinking goes against his faith....

Or Sarah Pailin who backed abstinence-only education and had a unwed underage teen daughter...

Or the dozens of gay Republicans who are caught in gay scandals. They also all voted to oppose LGBT rights...

Or the countless Republican congressmen who cheated on their wives but also preach about "family values" and "sanctity of marriage''...

Or Republican Rep. Scott DesJarlais who is Anti-Choice pressured his mistress to get a abortion...

Or Mitt Romney comical 360 degree flip flops on every key issue he onced held - healthcare reform, abortion, gun control, gay rights, climate change...

Or Birther Movement activists who want Ted Cruz for 2016...

I had to take a drug test when I got a job washing dishes.

Years later, I had to take a drug test when I got a job selling welding supplies.

If I had to urinate in a cup for those positions (Seriously, washing dishes, for goodness sake?!), then I feel that ALL elected officials should take drug tests. Why the heck not??

reply to post by NaturalDizaster


I work for a non-profit that runs the busiest food pantry in the capital of my state.

This absolutely is NOT hypocrisy because of the difference in income.

Senators make $174,000+ a year in base salary, and assuredly have no problems providing food for their families. I'm sure they have plenty of other money to spend on jet skis, dry cleaning, hookers, drugs, or whatever else they feel like spending their EXTRA money on.

Someone who presumably doesn't have enough money to provide for their families, yet can afford a drug habit, should not be allowed assistance until they kick their drug habit.

It's as simple as that.

If you have $50 and you have the option to either spend it on crack or on groceries and you choose crack, you made the wrong choice and should suffer the consequences.

reply to post by crashjob

This absolutely is NOT hypocrisy because of the difference in income.

It's hard for me to conceive that your even serious right now. Senators can buy all the hookers and coc aine that they want, because they earn more money. But if poor people do the exact same thing, it wrong and shameful. There's hypocrisy #1 in your post.

Then second fallacy I see in your reasoning is that his salary is coming directly from your paycheck, and you have no problem with him spending it on coc aine, while he's supposed to be in charge of writing and voting on laws that effect your daily life and well being. But you do have a considerable problem with some poor shlub in the streets who has no obligation to the public, took no oath of office to uphold the laws of this country, spending money taken out of your paycheck on drugs.

Your post is bass ackwards my friend.

reply to post by NaturalDizaster


Also...what does that $174,000 in taxpayer money buy beside coc aine?

Apart from being the most indisputably "do nothing" Congress in recorded history...How often do they actually show up to work and do nothing?

House members have been in Washington for 56% of all non-holiday weekdays -- essentially, fewer than three days a week. Senators have walked into the Capitol for 61% of weekdays.

The weeks are not just shorter, but consistently so. The Senate did not have a single five-day work week in Washington for the first seven months of the year. The House had two.

www.cnn.com...

We'll then absolutely take his food stamps.

reply to post by NaturalDizaster


There are more than two political parties in this country, just a little fyi. I know that many try to tell you that there are only two, but that isn't true. The only way to enact (peaceful) change is to encourage more third party voting. Don't listen to rhetoric and lies that tell you voting third party is throwing your vote away or things like that. You see, you are still swept up in the party lies and rhetoric if you believe that Democrat or Republican are our only two options. I vote Libertarian.

reply to post by crashjob


So, do they go for those high paying jobs to support their habit? Yes, the rich are so much better at being bad that they don't have to pay consequences.

lol Republican in this thread.. deflecting deflecting.. its like the word Obama is their every other word.


Why do republicans care about a poor person need a drug test while big guy like this politician gets off scott free?

They like to pick on the weak who are fighting for survival, but cowards when it comes to politicians of their political party.

Yup, 2016 is a democratic win for sure.

reply to post by Krazysh0t

that show that doing these programs is a waste of money and never produces the results the legislators are looking for.

you'd be surprised.

people who do drugs are acutely aware of whether or not they'll pass a test, so those who will fail will not show up, use one of the many products that will get it out of their system before the drug test, or use fake urine.

just because not many are caught doesn't mean that the program isn't working, but it could be improved. randomized screening tests after the initial drug test would be ideal.

By now we know whites are the biggest users of illegal drugs and recipients of public assistance, but the face we see is of the most ignorant black people they can find, which some seem to think represent the african american population. People still have the audacity to ask why people are angry.

reply to post by Bob Sholtz


I wouldn't be surprised. I am well aware of how drug culture works, trust me (and that is all I will elaborate on that point too).

Well all evidence is pointing to the contrary as shown by the links I've provided. I mean if there was a minority of people getting caught that was say around 20%, I'd maybe say you may have a point, but the people getting caught are in the single percentage points. Everything you just said is a complete guess. So until there can be shown actual evidence that it is catching people and worth the money, I'm going to have to say that these programs are a waste of taxpayers dollars and should be thrown in the trash bin of ideas. It is far more likely that drug use being rampant among welfare users is just a myth.

By the way, those products that supposedly "cleanse" your system don't work unless you spend ALOT of money on them, and those only work over a period of time (and are unhealthy). At best they just mask the offending metabolites in your system from being detected. So that crap you buy at the local head shop is a waste of money.

tl/dr- its not hypocrisy, you lump. Its tackling an issue. I'm for drug testing welfare or any government handout/stimulus recipient. There is no excuse for having illegal substances in your blood if your depending on tax dollars to feed yourself.

Maybe you aren't 21 yet, and don't run into the guys sitting outside of liquor stores begging you to trade them cash for their EBT cards.

Maybe you've never worked a job behind a cash register in a small town, and were able to see the truth behind the system: the girl who had a few abortions through highschool, has been in trouble with the law since day one; shes got mysteriously over a grand in EBT value every month to spend on her red bulls and Monsters while her kids are begging her for food. The poor old woman who's just trying to get her milk and eggs for the night? She's got less than 200.

The system's completely F*d

reply to post by NaturalDizaster

I think all politicians should work for free like they used way back when, it is called public service after all. As for people getting food stamps and doing drugs, yes they should be cut off from government aid, all aid. If they have money for drugs they don't need assistance. I have absolutely no sympathy for drug and alcohol addicts. It is a choice. On the other hand, if someone truly needs assistance they should be allowed it with controls. Not the current controls that are designed to keep those on assistance from getting off the government aid. But ones that would allow a person to gradually ease out of the program when they get back on their feet, not cut them off as soon as they make a paltry amount, or makes them quit their job or work less hours because if they make $0.25 more an hour (not enough to survive) but enough to be cut from the system. Personally, I don't care if any one does drugs just that they don't harm others or make me pay for it.

Anyone with a working brain and a rudimentary grasp of logic knows drug testing "welfare" recipients costs the tax-payers more than it saves by several orders of magnitude. Google "Florida drug tests welfare recipients" if you actually want to find out why.

I'll give you a hint. It's a money grab by those with legislative power who also happen to own the drug testing companies involved. LOLZ all around.

This guy is a schmuck. But - he's a rich white schmuck so he will skate with a little probation, some counseling / AA and a bit of Jesus. Same as it ever was.

This guy is a hypocrite! The hypocrisy reminds me of that huffington post writer who always talked about how the right wing was so violent and then she stabbed her ex girlfriend over 200 times with a screwdriver.

I thought they were all crooked in the dark anyway, right?