Dramatic – but rare – outcomes sell products and services. It can be a triple digit weight loss or a 2^nd hand Meth user going berserk in a tavern. That's why businesses that sold based on testimonial or anecdotal evidence were required to disclose the rarity of depicted outcomes to potential buyers. I pointed this out to our District Attorney and to our current Drug Czar and was blithely ignored despite the fact that police and public schools have used exceedingly rare occurrences involving drug use to sell a service: drug prohibition – while businesses would be prosecuted for fraud.

         Obama's solution to this inequity didn't occur to me until later. I started noticing that many infomercials and drug ads stopped including disclosures about rare results being atypical. This is the typical response of someone – like our county DA – who is soft on crime [especially when it comes to big government]. Why prosecute the private sector for deliberately misleading the public when it is so necessary for government to do so to protect us from problems created by government policy? That's right! Over 90% of the crime and over three quarters of drug abuse and addiction problems involving illegal drugs are caused by pro crime drug policies – that are “not open for discussion”.

       Consumers are on their own as far as fraud is concerned. You can't prosecute or sue any seller who implies misleading results or outcomes. The lie has to be blatant or you lose. And my complaint is partially responsible.