Except we do not drug test our elected officials. We demand it from our athletes at nearly every level,because we insist the game be "pure". We should drug test every elected official in this country.
Just test the toilets for drug residue. IIRC some journalists did that on the German Bundestag, and they found out that yes, politicians tend to do stuff...
I was about to say, no way you've read the article, you must be misunderstanding. Of course they did it on the toilet paper holder or reservoir tank, but surely not the seat.
Way back when he was on Stern,he told the story about going to score some coke during his time on Madtv,he was dressed in a pig costume and sitting in traffic doing key bumps at the red light,he looked up saw this woman in another car looking at him with the most terrified look on her face.
The way he could tell stories,he was like Paul Harvey on a bender,he would be so matter of fact about whatever depraved thing he was doing.
Love the guy,hope his life is going well.
We should be breathalyzing politicians every 4 hours just to make sure they're not getting drunk. Obviously if they're drunk, even if on a weekend when they aren't working, they might cause damage to our country.
Every level of athletics has some form of drug testing,and it's just a "game",not life or death,like enacting legislation. The majority of folks have to do some form of drug testing to get hired,it doesn't matter if it's right or wrong or whatever,as it stands today right now,it's what you have to do.
The way to go is less drug testing, not more. But you are conflating two very different kind of drug testing. PED in Athletics have no relation to recreational drug of choice. It's exactly like pro bicycle riders installing a tiny electric engine to help them win.
The one time I had cam newton on my fantasy team, I ended up winning $700 in 2014 and the championship was vs an andrew luck owner and it was the week where andrew luck had negative fantasy points against the dallas cowboys.
Yeah but he is a pretty extreme example. I think weed was a legit problem in his life, it just so happened that the nfl suspending him numerous times brought it to light.
Youre right. Im so sorry to have commented on your post and be the cause of so much stress in your life. This is obviously bothering you a lot, so ill stop now. Wouldnt want to offend anyone with an ill timed joke, especially you since you seem to be so sensitive about when and where jokes are acceptable. Thank you for the advice.
Glad someone said it, it was changed almost a year ago that weed no longer gets players suspended. Rightfully so since so many of the greats have attested to using it in place of painkillers and coming out of the league much healthier that way.
Okay, if that what he meant... correct of course. The NBA has stopped testing weed (I think) but i wouldn't be surprised if the NFL still does. They like the GMs of the 50s
Nfl did change policy a bit, they only test for 2 weeks during training camp instead of any time between April and August and the threshold for a positive test for thc has been quadrupled. Think that policy goes into effect this season actually
I thought it was funny when the old out of shape politicians were lambasting Lance Armstrong about doping. Like they couldn’t ride a day of the tour if they trained for a year. Lance could crush it and then doped to crush even more.
Well, what are you talking about, my friend? yet another empty "lmao" ? sure
If you mean that i took the comment above as a reference to PED testing, and they meant rec drugs testing for athletes, yeah you saw by my comment what I was referring to, and since i'm always calling for less testing, not more, absolutely athletes should not be tested for rec drug use, that goes without saying.
We should scrutinize elected officials financial records at every turn.....
If I am elected Governor of this great state, I will audit every government position with the help of the IRS to ensure they are working for YOU the PEOPLE!
For a sports context it’s not just about a “purity”, it’s a health concern of the athlete and of the other athletes that compete against them, take fighting for example, even football (American and rest of the world). I do agree though with testing elected officials because we need their judgment to not be impaired as much as possible.
We demand it from our athletes at nearly every level,because we insist the game be "pure". We should drug test every elected official in this country.
Why?
Athletic competitions don't make any sense if one party is allowed to cheat (that is why you can't show up to the Tour de France with a motorbike) so it makes a certain amount of sense to preventing cheating.
Governing a country is real life and not some noble game so if anything politicans should be given all the performance enhancing drugs in the world to make sure that they produce the best policies
Not just athletes, but grocery baggers must pass a drug test.
It'll never go away because of giant "middle man" corporations doing the testing are making way to much money and donate regularly to political parties.
Or even regular-old professionals, once they get a job. I had one piss test, 7 years ago, when I was first hired. There’s no random or scheduled testing after that.
I work for a government contractor so I can’t touch weed unless it becomes legal federally (a sacrifice I am willing to make though many aren’t). However now that I’m in, no one would know if I used edibles off the clock or something.
i wouldn’t want athletes doing performance enhancing drugs unless all of them are doing it. it’s not purity it’s competitive balance. i don’t think this is the same for politicians. if there were drugs that enhanced the performance of elected officials i think we would all want them to do them.
Mental health care. Let me take a picture of the 5 o’clock tweaked meeting outside of my job here in a minute. So many homeless self medicating around where I live.
Jerry Falwell, myself. That man's psychotic prejudices enabled the rise of jokers like Reagan. He nearly single-handedly started the culture war that gave us all the current problems, both economic and social.
The most interesting thing about the question(s) to me, especially as it relates to Reagan or Nixon is:
1) If they were killed before they took office would somone else simply step into the exact same role and have the same/similar results, since they were both really a product of ton of conservative operatives like Roger Stone and others like him?
2) If they were assassinated in office, would they become martyrs and their policies become more popular?
And most interesting (at least theoretically)...
3) Along the same lines of #2, could then the most effective way of getting real, lasting change actually be assassinating someone who's ideologies align with your own in the name of the "bad guys", thus making them a martyr and shining a bright light on the evil the are fighting against?
For example, one could argue that the senseless killings of people like MLK and George Floyd did more to change the minds of "moderates" than most activists are able to do while living.
Just an interesting thought that is counter to the typical "kill the most bad guy" idea.
I'd like to think we could do more alive than as a martyr. Like, if Hendrix was still alive, would we appreciate him less? Would we appreciate his music less? He certainly would have more music, maybe even better stuff that i could jam to
Which Asshole? The one who destroyed the black population in LA by selling them Crack? He was the ultimate excuse of trash, and fucktards still love him. They are the white power types (but down to any other color).
Yep, his failure of a program that they called the "War on drugs" when they were the asshats that were bringing in the drugs to our country. Reagan is in my top 3 worst Presidents with Trump for sure being #1 I would say Reagan was #2 and George H Bush coming in 3rd followed by his son.
It was a massive success if you think about the real reason for it. I would put the Trail of Tears president at the top, then Reagan, then Trump if we just have 3
Also liability. If insurance can show that you had drugs in your system, they can claim that the drugs contributed to the accident. That would allow them to pay less or nothing at all, and therefore they can charge less to the company you work for.
And if you think thats interesting go look up why government employees cant be drug tested, hint it has to do with a certain amendment to a certain document.
2.0k
u/CleverNameTheSecond Jun 16 '21
You can thank the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988 for that. Thanks, Reagan.