Sunday, like millions of others, I watched the Super Bowl. I watched it not because I cared who won, but because I think the spectacle of the whole thing is entertaining. It’s a guilty pleasure. Washed-up pop stars, over-produced advertisements and thematically corporate dance numbers. What could be more middle American?
- Paul Wong
- David Enders
Unfortunately, this year’s circus proved pretty lame. The commercials were especially disappointing. Save teasers for “Charlie’s Angels: Full Throttle” (the most suggestive movie title in recent history), there wasn’t much to get excited about.
Except the new anti-drug commercials.
When I first noticed these affronts to reason a few months ago, I wrote them off as too ridiculous to write on. The only fitting comparison is “Reefer Madness,” the propaganda film of the 1930s that depicts marijuana use leading to murder.
Please tell the kids: They’re being lied to. I don’t advocate the use of drugs by teens or pre-teens. But lying to them about the repercussions of marijuana use or weakly correlating traditionally aberrant behaviors with smoking pot is counterproductive, if only because they’ll be less likely to listen about other stuff when they figure it out.
“If you quit drugs, you join the fight against terror in America.” – George W. Bush
The most scurrilous argument made against drug use is that it supports terrorism. My first reaction was to simply advocate buying domestic, but that sidesteps the real problem. The single greatest supporter of drug-related terrorism (and the single greatest impediment to its own “War on Drugs”) is the U.S. government. As long as it’s convenient, the actions of drug-trafficking regimes go unchallenged. Colombian President Alvaro Uribe V