What Is The Opposite Of “I Didn’t Inhale And I Never Tried It Again”?
That would be what Barack Obama said when speaking to a group of high school students in New Hampshire:
Of course the Church Ladies among us were not amused. Mitt Romney said it was a “huge error” for Obama to admit drug use and that “It’s just not a good idea for people running for President of the United States who potentially could be the role model for a lot of people to talk about their personal failings while they were kids because it opens the doorway to other kids thinking ‘well I can do that too and become President of the United States’”
OK. Sure. Whatever. Since when are politicians role models? Obviously since before we knew the dirt on JFK.
Fortunately, Rudy Giuliani injects some reality into Mitt’s fantasy world: “I respect (Obama’s) honesty in (admitting drug/alchol use). I think that one of the things we need from our people who are running for office is not this pretense of perfection. The reality is all of us that run for public office, whether its governor, legislator, mayor, president—we are all human beings. If we haven’t made mistakes don’t vote for us cause we got some big ones that are gonna happen in the future and we won’t know how to handle them.”
Considering all we know about our past POTUS; JFK’s prodigious womanizing and super-human drug use, LBJ’s womanizing and lying about VietNam, Nixon’s dark and dirty tricks, Bill Clinton’s womanizing and perjury, etc. the idea that anyone, including those under the age of 18, thinks the POTUS is some super-human flawless being
is just plain laughable.
Obama wrote about his drug use in his book “Dreams From My Father”, which was first published in 1995. Kudos to him for getting this out in the open instead of using the lame “I didn’t inhale” idiocy, and kudos to Rudy for defending him.
If Obama was still using drugs today—-then all bets would be off, but for anyone to be excluded from public service due to some youthful stupidity is wrong. Do we really want to be ruled by moralistic prigs?
BTW, even if you don’t agree with Obama’s ideology you should read “Dreams From My Father”— Obama isn’t just a politician, he is also a gifted writer and storyteller.
I agree with you 100% on this. I am glad Rudy gave the response he did. Too often all we hear is responses like Romney. And it is always hypocritical, because who hasn’t done something wrong. To me that is why all the republican scandals are so amazing. They spent so many years talking about how bad all these things were and then so many of them get caught doing the acts.
There’s nothing wrong with making mistakes or making bad choices, its just when you ostracize others for doing it and act like you are perfect that ticks me off.
Comment by Robbie | November 21, 2007
I also agree with you 100% on this subject. It is absurd to suggest that admitting and owning up to a youthful indescretion somehow disqualifies someone to be president or for a cabinent appointment. I agree that “Dreams From My Father” is a excellent book.
Comment by David Barrett | November 21, 2007
I have never taken illegal drugs. I do not even like taking anything stronger than aspirin. And I am not a big fan of drug addicts in positions of power. I have had to deal with them too many times. The worst part is they are like alcoholics, just one crisis away from coming into the workplace all glassy eyed and stoned.
However with the drug culture so firmly entrenched in early youth it seems an almost impossibility to find leaders that have not participated in illegal pharmaceutical experiments. And accompanying the trouble is, society has also created a need to survive off dangerous legal prescription drugs. I have previously spoken about how you are often not allowed to participate in reindeer games unless you have a note from your doctor stating that you had properly taken your prescribed dose of Soma. It has also become clear that even back in the early sixties doctors had Kennedy strung out on pain killers for his bad back. Hitler was supposedly taking “vitamin” shots (that included narcotics)to keep going through WW2. It is well documented that President Grant was an alcoholic. In fact many now illegal substances were legal to take until the early 1900’s. So it is hard to tell just how many and how well drugs were entrenched with past powerful leaders. I do not approve but it is just another part of life. You watch them like a hawk and if there is a problem, out the door is my philosophy on drug addicts and drunks.
Comment by thescoundrel | November 21, 2007
a mistake in your teens or even early 20’s is nothing compared to the ignorance of some in their 40’s and 50’s. There go I but for the grace of God, but I will not hold someones alcohol or drug use against them, unless it continues and it effects their lifes and their decisions.
Comment by blackmax | November 21, 2007
This is the third time I’ve seen the subject of behavior and personal accountability would come up this week.
Here’s accountability, an interesting comparison in standards: Super Hornet CO Fired. The man loses his job for a DUI while simply trying to drive 300 yards to his room from the club…and rightfully so, given his position.
But back on thread…
It’s refreshing to see politicians admit mistakes they’ve made in the past. Not just “mistakes” but actual crimes, and yet we are able to forgive. Forgiveness has limits, though. I’m sure we wouldn’t be talking so forgivingly had one of the candidates admitted to committing a violent crime. But where exactly is our “forgiveness” line? Again, it’s a matter of standards.
What’s also interesting to me is the timeframes in which people make mistakes. Something minor that happens today has such a greater impact than something major that happened a decade ago…as long as a candidate doesn’t try to hide it.
Granted, I’m just going to generalize this and not tag on a specific example. I’m sure someone would be more than willing to pile on an example or three.
Comment by Huck Finn | November 22, 2007
Huck, two comments about your comment:
1. Ted Kennedy is a classic study in where voters draw the line. He killed a girl, and he wasn’t in his teens or twenties, and he used his family connections to avoid consequences, got less than a slap on the wrist, yet the good people of MA have elected him to the US Senate for decades after the event. But the CW is that he lost his bid for POTUS against the worst POTUS in my lifetime, Jimmy Carter, in part because of what he did (and didn’t do) at Chappaquidick. Well, that and not knowing the answer to the question: “Why do you want to be president?”
2. Your link was informative and got me thinking (in a bad way, naturally) that the military is the only government agency that the public trusts implicitly. Since I’m so unimpressed with the current (large) field of POTUS wannabees (from both parties), I got to thinking that the best thing for our country would be a military coup d etat.
Oh sure, I know that the reason our military has civilian control is to prevent coups, etc. etc., but still, the military seems to be the only goverment agency that has the discipline to get things done and to punish wrongdoers.
I know the military has their political games, but the public trusts them, they seem to know how to cut through the bureaucratic b.s. and get things done, and those who DON’T git ‘er done, are punished.
Be warned! Don’t get me thinking—-I cannot and will not be responsible for the results!
Comment by qcexaminer | November 23, 2007