And they let ex-gang members and ex-street thugs into law enforcement(detective positions) because they are "street smart"?Or ,is that just on TV?Seems this narrow minded thinking will allow almost any previous behavior except previous smoking of "the dreaded weed".Maybe they should have hired you with honors,because you were honest enough to admit burning some reefer as a teen.Or, did they beat it out of you?Originally posted by gaugeguy:<br /> Funny, I was disqualified from joining the police force after leaving the Marines because I smoked pot when I was a teenager. So if you smoke a little herb, you can't become a cop, but you can become President.
I was going through the background check polygraph, so I had to tell the truth. When the guy that was administering the polygraph heard me say "yes" when he asked if I had ever used illegal drugs, he about fell over backwards and his eyes bugged out like Arnold's in Total Recall. After the polygraph, the Captain of the force told me I was disqualified and that it "was too bad, you would have made a good officer"Originally posted by ob:<br /> Maybe they should have hired you with honors,because you were honest enough to admit burning some reefer as a teen.Or, did they beat it out of you?
<br /><br />With all the happenings on this planet,we keep on hearing the same old song over and over and over <br /><br />What ever happened to true investigative journalism? They did ask me if I had ever stolen anything valued over $50, if I had ever been involved in a domestic violence incedent, if my marriage was stable, if I had more than 5 drinks a week, ever been arrested and not convicted, ever done illegal drugs and a bunch of other things that were simple "no" answers. <br /><br />Oh, BTW the only reason I applied for the job was that the unemployment office sent me there. I just happened to ace the written part of the exam so I was the #1 finalist going into the background check. I was kind of glad that I didn't get the job, and so weren't all of my doper friends
<br /><br />As for Bush, if smacking a bong once or twice is the worst thing they can get on him during private phone calls, then he is OK in my book.There was an interesting TV series here recently called "Altered Statesmen" that looked each week at one national leader from a medical perspective. <br /><br />Probably slanted to prove its case but Reagan certainly was never the same after he got shot and was propped up by his advisers. Quite possibly was suffering from early Alzheimer's while in office. JFK had significant problems with heavy medication for ? Addison's disease. Churchill had serious problems with grog and depression, which has been well known for a long time. Can't remember who else they looked at. <br /><br />The end result was that national leaders often are very different in private to the way they appear in public; the truth is concealed by those around them; and you have to worry about their capacity to discharge their office at times, or whether they're really the ones making the decisions.<br /><br />I'd be more worried about what the truth is now than what it was 20 or 30 years ago, except to the extent that lies about the past indicate a willingness to lie about the present or the future. Still, if politicians had to stop lying they wouldn't have much to say.
Nothing worse than wasting good buds! 
Yup.. It's a vendetta... Not unlike the vendetta the conservatives had for ol' Billy Boy & Hillary... <br /><br />Remember.. What goes around, comes around....
