I don’t particularly mind the drug czar pointing out that cocaine can kill you. While far from the deadliest thing on earth, the stuff ain’t good for you, especially given the way some folks get carried away with it. I agree that a sensible drug policy includes telling people that cocaine pretty much sucks.

But here we have the drug czar highlighting reports of tainted cocaine in Canada and proposing drug treatment as the solution to that. Isn’t it ironic that, after tirelessly advocating policies which drive drug distribution underground, the drug czar then cites a poisoned drug supply as an argument for abstinence?