Economy's Rise Has Political Factions Vying Over Who Gets Credit

I think you lean a little to heavy on the conspiracy thing. There are different points of view and yes the Dems are making a compromise with the reps unfortunately it will have to be done I just want the maximum amount of fairness. I am for and wish they had passed a public option, but they didn't maybe if we can vote out the reps in 2014 we can get a public option on the board.

===============================

Do me a favor, read this.

There's no "conspiracy" about it; it is just a matter of "different points of view" - Democratic politicians just don't happen to be for what their supporters believe that they're for.  

I come at this as an old OLD liberal Democrat, one who had been in government and party politics for many years.  I've never voted for a Republican (and never will), but I can honestly say I can't see myself voting for any Democrat again.  I come to my opinions based on facts that I include in my comments (see the colored text hyperlinks).  I can decipher legislative text with the best of them, translate political-speak (aka lawyer-speak, Bush-speak, the word-craft of the Frank Luntzes, etc.) although sometimes even I am lulled into believing their intentions are good and noble.  They're not; invariably in the days immediately following, some information will surface exposing their deception.  

There could be 100 "progressives" in the Senate & 435 in the House, & they & Obama would still find a way to deliver to corporations instead of the People, & then try to blame it on Republicans.

It's way past time to get the DLC-Democrats out of office, out of the DemocraticParty, & put real Democrats in.  That's what we thought we were doing when we put Obama in over HillaryClinton.  But in came Obama who put the Clinton team into the WhiteHouse, & not one liberal in his administration.  He actually kept liberals neutralized for close to a year, with vague promises & nomination paralysis (waiting to be confirmed, where they weren't free to speak out about his Republican-ways.  No recess appointments, just half-hearted excuses.

Lily Tomlin was right: "No matter how cynical I get, it's impossible to keep up."
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Actor Ed Begley Jr.: Obama 'Should Die In His Boots' In Fight Against Climate Change (VIDEO)

DLC/Third Way/No Labels-Democr­ats and Republicans like to foster the fallacy that there is an extreme or far left faction within the DemocraticParty.   There are no extremes or far left in the Democratic­Party.  They left long ago, and can be found bombing animal testing labs and burning down suburban subdivisio­n sites being built on land where ancient forest have been clear cut.  If they vote at all anymore, it's as Independen­ts and rarely for Democrats.

The fact is, real Democratic policies aren't that hard to sell to Americans; they're only hard to sell to Obama's 'most ardent supporters' who are either political operatives paid to cheer him online or ignorant b00bs who treat politics like sporting events, something to pick a side and root over instead of educating themselves on all aspects of the issues.

When most Americans want Medicare and other government programs which they've benefitted from to continue and teabaggers shout "No government control of healthcare­; Get your hands off my Medicare", the answer is EDUCATION.  

When informed of the issues, most Americans agree with liberal policies. Neither they (nor I) would characteri­ze themselves as far-anythi­ng or extreme, but mainstream­. For example, nobody likes the idea of abortion, but most Americans do not want the government involved if they find themselves in the predicamen­t of an unwanted pregnancy. And if you frame it as, "You like to kill babies?!?! ?!?!", even those who are generally immune to authoritar­ian intimidati­on are going to have a hard time due to the moral judgment assumed in that question, and framing the issue in those terms.

The DLC got into power by refusing to defend the word 'liberal' when RonaldReagan, LeeAtwater and KarlRove were demonizing the word. Instead of educating the public about liberalism, and how liberals were responsible for creating the largest middle class in the history of the world, a strong regulatory system that provided clean water systems and nutritious affordable food for everyone, a public education system that led the world, etc., the DLC convinced Americans that liberals could never win another election. The DLC attributed to ideology what is more accurately explained by lousy campaigns outgunned by election dirty tricks and fraud.

If the Bush years taught us anything, it's that anyone can sell anything to Americans, if you're stolid and relentless in your sales pitch and tactics. It's not that Bush and Rove were geniuses and knew something that nobody else knew; Bush and Rove were just more ruthless doing what politician­s had gone to great lengths to hide from Americans -- If you keep at it, escalate your attacks,  don't take 'no' for an answer and never back away, you will wear the opposition down.

But Obama only does that to progressiv­es.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Actor Ed Begley Jr.: Obama 'Should Die In His Boots' In Fight Against Climate Change (VIDEO)

There are ways of going about it, but that's not what Obama wants.  In fact, Obama's healthcare legislation's a good example of how he went about NOT getting what the voters put him and Democrats into power to achieve (affordable, quality medical treatment for everyone), but making his supporters believe as you do.  

For example, Obama was completely against mandates.  He criticized Hillary's support of them -- Here's CandidateObama on mandates.

Before the healthcare debate even began, Obama made sure that there'd be no PublicOption, no SinglePayerUniversal healthcare­, no means for Americans to choose a public healthcare system, no means for containing  costs through public healthcare programs.  He took SinglePayer off the table and blocked all efforts to get a PublicOption in the final legislatio­n due to the secret deal he made (and then lied about, and then had to own up to when the memo was leaked).

A caller on CSpan just a few months ago asked RichardWolffe, who was out plugging his latest book written from his special access to the Obama WhiteHouse, if we're ever going to get a PublicOption to keep costs down.

Wolffe makes it clear that Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democrats never had any intention of going with a PublicOption or expanding public healthcare in any way (although Wolffe's mistaken when he says that Obama never ran on supporting a PublicOption).

Obama campaigned on reregulati­ng businesses and banks. He campaigned on ending tax breaks and subsidies to companies moving their factories and jobs overseas. 

Now? Not so much. 

You get the regulation­s first and then you give them the money. You put a whole healthcare program together BEFORE you get money for healthcare IT that heaven only knows how it can comply with HIPAA. You keep your entire shopping list of needs & wants on the table (SinglePayerUniversal healthcare) BEFORE you concede it away. Anyone who's ever written/negotiated a contract knows this. 

Obama's done everything backwa­rds. What he does only makes sense if he's NOT a populist, NOT a liberal (we knew he wasn't, but Obama's most ardent supporters implored people to believe that "once he gets into the Oval Office, you'll see!"), and is a continuati­on of the same failed policies of transnatio­nal corporatio­ns that've destroyed the middle class. 

What Obama's doing only makes sense if what he wants is NOT what Obama's most ardent followers claims that they want. The only way to get Obama to do the people's bidding, get him to champion WeThePeople and not the Corporatio­ns is for Obama's 'most ardent supporters­' to stop defending him; they work against their own best interests when they do that.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Actor Ed Begley Jr.: Obama 'Should Die In His Boots' In Fight Against Climate Change (VIDEO)

If Obama and DLC-Democrats had believed that the Koch Brothers, Dick Armey and the Tea Party to be a threat, had they wanted to put the Tea Party down, the time to do it was last year during the healthcare debate when the Tea Party was coming to prominence. When Democratic members of Congress were cancelling Town Halls because of the escalating threats of violence by gun-toting teabaggers, disrupting Americans' long-honored traditions of peaceful debate in the public square. Instead of taking to the bully pulpit, instead of increasing security on government properties hosting these events, Obama disappeared from the healthcare debate to cut secret deals with Big Insurance, PhRma, hospitals, the AMA, etc., and then he lied about it, all the while that the Tea Party grew and bullied at Town Halls.

What Obama also did during the same Town Hall time period? He unleashed federal security forces to Pittsburgh to break up peaceful protests of the G20 meeting, using the new weaponry on dissenters who the 'establishment elites' really fear, and stem the unrest that actually threatens the 'elites', i.e., the American people taking back their government. -http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/blog/2009/sep/25/sonic-cannon-g20-pittsburgh

Obama had no problem quelling dissent or inspiring our better angels when he wanted or needed to.

The Tea Party is an effective nemesis for Obama and helps him and the DLC deliver to their (and Republicans') Corporate Masters.  The Tea Party is a paper tiger, a scapegoat, and not the real problem.  This is all Kabuki theater, to push us into accepting being robbed blind while politicians in both parties jockey for positions of favor and power within the corporatocracy.

The Tea Party serves this end it several ways. Chiefly though it lets both parties keep a legislative agenda to the right of center. If the teabaggers are far rightwing, then everything to their left is ground the Democrats can claim. And that's a lot of corporate-money ground.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Actor Ed Begley Jr.: Obama 'Should Die In His Boots' In Fight Against Climate Change (VIDEO)

1) Republicans haven't been filibustering; they've been threatening to filibuster.  Harry Reid could have forced them to actually do it, filibuster, at any time.  That is at the discretion of the Senate Majority Leader (Democrat Harry Reid).  Senate Rule 22.  When it serves something that the DLC-contro­lled Democrats want, Harry Reid can (and has) require the GOP to actually filibuster (stand and talk without end).  

Harry Reid has had no problem forcing the GOP to actually filibuster when it's something that the DLC wants and perceives it needs. For example, when Democrats needed unemployme­nt benefits to continue because the masses were becoming 'critical'­, Reid had no problem calling Republican Jim Bunning's bluff to filibuster­. Reid said, "Bring in the cots, do it" and Bunning and the GOP caved. Benefits for unemployed workers continued.

Democrats could even have changed the supermajor­ity rule (it does NOT have to be done at the beginning of a new Congress, as some argued). It can be done at any time (see page 6 - http://fpc .state.gov­/documents­/organizat­ion/45448. pdf ].

But Democrats put off their critics for not forcing the Republican­s to actually filibuster and changing Senate Rule 22 during the session by assuring fed-up Democratic voters, "We'll change the rule come the beginning of the next Congress".

They didn't.

There's not just one way (or even two or three) for Democrats to get bills passed without Republican votes.

But Obama and the DLC-contro­lled Democratic­Party didn't and aren't doing that. Because it might actually work to get Democratic voters' legislativ­e agenda made into the law of the land and do good for the People.  And that's not what Obama and Company are there for.

Obama and Company are there to do the work of the transnatio­nal corporatio­ns.  Along with the Republican­s, as was clearly evidenced the time that Harry Reid kept the Senate open (pro forma) so that Obama couldn't make recess appointmen­ts, collaborat­ing with Republican­s to keep progressiv­es and liberals out of government­.  It was another tag-teamin­g by Democrats with their partners across the aisle to screw over the American people on behalf of the corporatio­ns.

Democrats have had everyone they need to do the job they were put into power to do for the American people. They don't want to do it.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Actor Ed Begley Jr.: Obama 'Should Die In His Boots' In Fight Against Climate Change (VIDEO)

As far as Obama's turning gray, have you seen Ron Christie lately?

That's what happens to people when they age.  It's happening no more so, not any quicker, than had Obama remained in the Senate, or was out of government and in the private sector.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Actor Ed Begley Jr.: Obama 'Should Die In His Boots' In Fight Against Climate Change (VIDEO)

During the Bush years, Democrats said if people wanted change, they had to put Democrats in the majority in Congress. So in 2006, we did.  Democrats took control of the House and gained 6 seats in the Senate.

Nothing changed. 

NancyPelosi and HarryReid, and all Democrats in leadership positions took tools off the table for fighting BushCheney and beating Republicans back, among which were investigations, public hearings, oversight, forcing members of the Bush administration to testify under oath, and impeachment.  

They said, "You have to give us more Democrats -- 60 in the Senate".

In 2008, we did.  We gave them 60 for the DemocraticCaucus. And we gave them the WhiteHouse. 

Obama came into office with the wind at his back. More people voted for him, a black man in good old raclst America than ever voted for any other presidential candidate in the history of the US. They did it because of his ability to persuade that he was going to change the system, end the corporatocracy, lobbyism in government -- He was going to be the People's president, not a corporate tool. 

And no sooner did Obama get elected than he slammed the brakes on the momentum of his election, Obama did a 180-degree turn on his promises and slowed everything down. To "work in a bipartisan manner with Republicans" (Republicans had already announced they were going to block everything Democrats wanted to do, vote no on everything, in lockstep).  BlueDogs joined Republicans, except when it was something that Obama really wanted, then Obama bought them off ($100 million to MaryLandrieu, extras for BenNelson, etc.).

Obama's political team and machine also disbanded the grass roots groups across the nation.  This was a dead giveaway that the last thing these politicians want is an active populist movement.  Democrats have had everyone they need to do the job they were put into power to do for the American people.

Obama's 'most ardent supporters' need to get better informed; cultivating some real Democratic convictions wouldn't hurt either.  Because whether it's taking SinglePayerUniversalHealthcare, a PublicOption, investigations and prosecutions of BushCheney, etc., off the table, putting SocialSecurity and Medicare on the table, or continuing the BushCheney policies (and going BushCheney one better by asserting that presidents can kill American citizens with no due process, no oversight, at home and abroad, and 'preventively detain', the right to imprison anyone indefinitely because he thinks they might commit a crime), using JoeLieberman to hide behind and duck out on his campaign pledge of transparency and gut the FOIA, no real Democrat could continue to support any Democratic politician doing this.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Actor Ed Begley Jr.: Obama 'Should Die In His Boots' In Fight Against Climate Change (VIDEO)

He was put into the oval Office by citizens voting

==========================

For candidates pre-approved by the monied powers-that-be.

Unless and until there is drastic and uncompromi­sing change to our campaign financing system, until corporatio­ns are no longer 'persons' and are prohibited from participat­ing in elections and politics, all efforts to reform government are useless. But that is NOT going to happen under Obama or the DLC-contro­lled Democratic Party. It's not even on their 'To Do' list.

If only campaign finance reform and election reform were the same obsessions for Democrats that tax cuts and ending abortion is for Republican­s, we on the left would enjoy the same successes as Republican­s have had.  The rich and the corporatio­ns pay almost nothing in taxes, and access to abortion has been so restricted that in 92 percent of all of the counties of the US, a woman can't exercise their right of choice.

Unless there is drastic and uncompromi­sing change to our campaign financing system, until corporatio­ns are no longer 'persons' and are prohibited from participat­ing in elections and politics, all efforts to get government to work in the People's interests are doomed to failure.  

Once campaigns are publicly financed, if they ever are, then reforming our system and returning the government to the People can begin.  But now?  The fleecing and pillaging is ongoing.  By transnatio­nal corporatio­ns, made possible by both parties.  And Obaaaama sheepbots like you.  
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Economy's Rise Has Political Factions Vying Over Who Gets Credit

If you were a Republican for 50+ years, of course you would agree with much of what the Democrats are doing.  That's been the aim of the DLC/Third Way/No Labels (the Democratic establishment elites that have been controlling the party for the past 20+ years):  To turn the Democratic Party into the Republican Party of old, minus the rightwing extremists but including conservatives and neoconservatives.  They've been out to marginalize both the rightwing and the base of the Democratic Party (liberals) so that they could control government from the "center" (it's not the center, in fact, but right of center), for "the next 100 years".  

This isn't a big secret, but every time someone mentions it online here at HP, the Obaaaaaa-mabots launch into ad hominem slurs.  

This Democratic Party and Obama aren't better than Republicans; they're more effective.  More effective at achieving Republican Party goals.  Republicans couldn't achieve cutting Social Security, Medicare, or Medicaid, but it will all happen under an Obama presidency.  

Democratic members of Congress have pledged to do it, from Pelosi to the Progressive Caucus, have all sworn allegiance to Simpson-Bowles or some facsimile of it that includes CPI.  Just as the Progressive Caucus all pledged not to vote for any healthcare reform that didn't include a public option and then folded, the Progressive Caucus is already AWOL on this.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Outreach To Republicans Reflects Political Reality

Let me exemplify the problem that I, as an old liberal Democrat, have with the state of our government and elections.

You would think that Democratic politicians would be for the same things that I, as a liberal Democrat, am for -- Smart, progressive policies.  Even just the basics, what might be called "compromises", like leaving marijuana illegal, but just rescheduling it.  Or leaving it illegal for recreational use, but leaving medical marijuana dispensaries alone.  Like (on another topic), forget about stopping GMOs from getting into the food supply (oh how I wish), but at least allowing states to permit the labeling of GMOs on food so that I can make a choice whether I want to put GMOs into my body and my children's and grandchildren's bodies.  

Here is the roll call vote on the 6/21/2012 US Senate vote on a bill to permit states to require any food, beverage or other edible product offered for sale have a label on it indicating that it contains a genetically engineered ingredient.

Guess who else voted against this?

Democratic senators Al Franken, Sherrod Brown, Chuck Schumer, Dick Durbin, Ben Cardin, Jeff Bingaman, Tom Harkin, Debbie Stabenow, among other Democrats. Monsanto has bought and paid for them.  I'm told they're referred to as "The Monsanto Senators".

Al Franken, fercrissakes.

Unless and until there is drastic and uncompromi­sing change to our campaign financing system, until corporatio­ns are no longer 'persons' and are prohibited from participat­ing in elections and politics, all efforts to reform government are useless. But that is NOT going to happen under Obama or the DLC-contro­lled Democratic Party as we'd hoped when we put them in power in 2008; it's not even on their 'To Do' list.  Both parties are corrupt to the bone.

This liberal Democrat is done with the Democratic Party.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Outreach To Republicans Reflects Political Reality

When I say it's kabuki theater, this is what I mean:

Democratic politician­s in liberal districts get to talk a good game about being champions of the People, but when push comes to shove, if their votes are needed to cross over and kill liberal legislatio­n (like a public option or access to abortion, or PREVENT cuts to SocialSecurity/Medicare/Medicaid), the DNC will make sure they're covered come election time, with massive infusions of money into their campaign war chests and crushing any principled challenges to them from the left in their primaries.

The Kabuki theater that Democrats have performed over promises like a public option and ending the wars (they're not ended; they're expanded and being fought with mercenaries paid for by you and me) are two great cases in point.  

Let's look more closely at the ProgressiveCaucus, what charlatans they are, and how they tag-team us.

As the head of the Progressiv­eCaucus, Lynn Woolsey led 79 of the 82 members of the caucus to pledge that they would not vote for any healthcare reform legislatio­n that didn't include a public option.  
Woolsey then led the 79 to renege on the pledge.

LynnWoolsey liked to brag that she was the first to bring a resolution to end the war in Iraq.  She, and congressio­nal Democrats (and Obama) ran on ending the practice of paying for the wars through supplement­al emergency spending bills, and putting the wars on budget (see why that is significant here).

Democrats have had the ability to accomplish putting the wars on budget (and thus end the wars) since they took over control of Congress in 2006 and didn't it.  They didn't need Republican­s to do it.

Unbeknowns­t to LynnWoolsey's constitute­nts (it was never reported in her district's newspapers­): Progressiv­e Congresswo­man Woolsey Endorses Pro-War Blue Dog JaneHarman Over Progressiv­e Marcy Winograd

'Progressi­ves' like Woolsey let Obama continue with just about all of BushChene­y's policies, and wars, and let Obama go BushChene­y even better, by letting Obama assert, unchalleng­ed, that presidents have the right to kill Americans with no due process or oversight, push for 'preventiv­e detention' and no transparen­cy of anything a president asserts should be his secret.

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Outreach To Republicans Reflects Political Reality

SteveCohen
ElijahCummings
DannyDavis
RosaDeLauro
DonnaEdwards
SamFarr
ChakaFattah
LoisFrankel
MarciaFudge
JaniceHahn
JaredHuffman
RushHolt
MichaelHonda
SheilaJackson-Lee
HakeemJeffries
EddieBerniceJohnson
JoeKennedyIII
AnnMcLaneKuster
JohnLewis
DavidLoebsack
BenRayLujan
CarolynMaloney
EdMarkey
JimMcDermott 
GeorgeMiller
GwenMoore
JimMoran
EleanorHolmesNorton
FrankPallone
EdPastor
ChelliePingree
MarkPocan
JaredPolis
CharlesRangel
LucilleRoybal-Allard
LindaSanchez
JanSchakowsky
LouiseSlaughter
BennieThompson
JohnTierney
MelWatt
PeterWelch
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Outreach To Republicans Reflects Political Reality

KarenBass
XavierBecerra
EarlBlumenauer
SuzanneBonamici
MichaelCapuano
AndreCarson
DonnaChristensen
JudyChu
YvetteClarke
William “Lacy” Clay
EmanuelCleaver
DavidCicilline


KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

Obama Outreach To Republicans Reflects Political Reality

It's kabuki theater.

For the social compact of the UnitedStates, most of the CongressionalProgressiveCaucus has gone missing. Three-quarters of the 70-member caucus seem lost in political smog. Those 54 members of the ProgressiveCaucus haven’t signed the current letter that makes a vital commitment: “we will vote against any and every cut to Medicare, Medicaid, or SocialSecurity benefits — including raising the retirement age or cutting the cost of living adjustments that our constituents earned and need.”

AlanGrayson and MarkTakano initiated the forthright letter, circulating it among House colleagues. Addressed to Obama, the letter has enabled members of Congress to take a historic stand: joining together in a public pledge not to vote for any cuts in SocialSecurity, Medicare or Medicaid.

The Grayson-Takano letter is a breath of fresh progressive air, blowing away the customary fog that hangs over such matters on CapitolHill.

ProgressiveCaucus members who haven't stood up:

As of now, the following House members of the Congressional Progressive Caucus have NOT signed the letter pledging: “We will vote against any and every cut to Medicare, Medicaid, or SocialSecurity benefits -- including raising the retirement age or cutting the cost of living adjustments that our constituents earned and need.”

KEEP READING
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

U.S. Job Seekers Test Positive For Drugs At Highest Rate Since 2007, Study Finds

Most of the jobs we're talking about, that have the potential for disaster (and that's really the only reason the government needs to get involved, for the 'public good', the 'commons'), are in heavily licensed, trained occupations.  We're not talking about people who came off the street, it wasn't either direct planes over O'Hare or lowering the fries' basket into hot oil.  When people train for their jobs, when their employment in a profession requires licensing and continuing education and periodic review, they generally take great care in preserving that license and ability to earn a good living.  They've invested years and good money into it.  What drives them to use and abuse substances is not feeling good without substances.  That's standardly stress.  Job stress.  And that stress shows up in their job performance before they're resorting to substances.  And if you're not noticing it and doing something about  it, eliminating the circumstances that is creating stress on your employees, YOU/employer/manager are the problem.

What you're talking about is eliminating all risk from life, and that's just not possible.  Anticipating and preventing all possible risk.  How much prevention are you willing to do in any area of your life?

After 9/11, I saw where we were headed (Patriot Act, NSA, warrantless wiretapping, telecomm immunity, etc.) and said, "If the government locked us all up, put us in segmented communities which they'd be able to monitor and isolate at any given moment, we'd be safe from terror attacks.  But exactly how free would we be?"  The effect on the quality of our lives would change dramatically, because doing what is necessary to achieve guaranteed safety impinges on every other area of our life, from creativity to innovation and ingenuity.  Those who suggested strengthing cockpit door and putting air marshals on board all air flights were shouted down, "it's too expensive!"  Look at how much more we've spent, we're not any safer than we were on 9/10/2001, and the risk of terror attacks from blowback is higher now than it's ever been.

If drug use has never been higher (see stats from last week) and on-the-job drug use disasters are at an all-time low, drug use on the job isn't really a problem is it?
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

U.S. Job Seekers Test Positive For Drugs At Highest Rate Since 2007, Study Finds

Quite frankly, your argument smacks of the Republican logic;

========================================

Quite frankly, I think our current policies smack of Republic "one size fits all/'nuance' is a dirty word" logic. The way that government has gotten involved in what is the public's interest is cray-zy.

Our minds and bodies function due to a combination of chemicals.  Whether it's pharmaceuticals or food/alcohol/plants/fungi, taking any of these substances into our bodies produces changes in our bodies chemistries that make us feel good.  Or that is the game plan.  In other words, we take these substances to change or alter the way that we're feeling without these substances.  What works for one person may or may not work for another.  For example, you don't want to be anywhere near one of my daughters when she is craving sugar.  But you don't want to be anywhere near her 4-year old son after he's had sugar.  

When it comes to professionals on the job, you would probably be very surprised by the numbers that are substance users.  Since you mentioned surgeons, while nobody knows the exact numbers of nurses and doctors using substances, it's higher than you would probably be comfortable with.  Had you mentioned lawyers, I'd point out that they, too, are substance users.  Had you mentioned police, I'd point out that they, too, abuse drugs and alcohol (25%).  Imagine that, 1/4 of all police, people who are licensed to kill.  At least with lawyers, the public is only at risk of being tongue-lashed. Bad joke, sorry.

I know people (in all of these and other professions), who use marijuana and function exceptionally well on the job.  Better, actually, than without it.  It's just their particular body chemistry.  I couldn't do it - I should caveat that original statement, about my drug history and use of drugs (Lipitor):  In my much much younger days (the 1960s), I did smoke marijuana recreationally.  The way my body and mind function with THC isn't the same as the way that these others' bodies function with it.   It's because there is a potential for disaster (air traffic controllers, train conductors, etc.) and we can't or aren't able to qualify those who are high functioning with it from those who aren't, we've banned it.  

I know that I couldn't work stoned, just as I know that I couldn't/wouldn't operate on a patient after a couple of scotches.  The government trusts me with that decision on alcohol, but doesn't when it comes to marijuana or other drugs.
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...

U.S. Job Seekers Test Positive For Drugs At Highest Rate Since 2007, Study Finds

If you eliminate ALL employment drug testing, regardless of how sensitive or dangerous the position being tested for is, you invite the inevitable accident caused by being high or the decreased brain function from years of drug abuse.

===========================

Re-read my comment.  I said, ".....absent a work-related accident/injury".
Read the Article at HuffingtonPost

Read more...