two random questions
Two random questions I'd be grateful for a reply on. Reply to this disposable email address:
(1) Has anyone heard from Andrew Orlowski -- via email -- in the past six weeks?
(2) There's an ad running on some network with two guys at a bar talking about drug legalization. It is an anti-legalization ad. I'd be grateful for any help in tracking it down.
| Permalink | technorati
Comments (22)
The newest Tony Hillerman novel has a major subplot where a Washington
heavy hitter is opposing drug legalization because he is importing as a nice
little side business.
Amazingly cynical from this author.
I'm not sure if this is the ad you're talking about, but it sounds like a possibility. This one is put out by the Office of National Drug Control Policy.
You can check out their archives here as well, if this isn't the one you're looking for.
Lawrence, I emailed you an hour before you posted this. So I assume you're still having problems with your email software, in which case I'd be happy to conduct the conversation here.
On the other hand, you have my number. And yes, my vacation was great fun (for anyone still reading).
About the ads,
I've never heard such simplistic crap being passed as actual arguments before.
"Why is it bad?" "Because it is." "It is?" "Yes, it is."
WHAT??? And this convinces people??? Or, at the very least, they believe it convinces people? Either they take the american population for complete morons, devoid of any critical thinking, or, well, I'd rather not state the alternative, it's way too sad. Quickly browsing through the transcripts, and not a single one diverges from this simplistic script.
And our tax dollars PAY for this crap?????
Sorry about this rant, things like this make me fume. I think they had a better argument with their "This is your brain on drugs" campain of 15-20 years ago. This campain is too insulting for words. BOTH sides of the fence (with regards to the issue of drugs) should be outraged.
My favorite of these is one is "The Ploy": Here's the transcript, which is available here
Norm: It's a ploy.
Nick: What?
Norm: This "Drug money funds terror". It's a ploy.
Nick: A ploy.
Norm: A manipulation.
Nick: Ploy.
Norm: "Drug money funds terror." I mean, why should I believe that?
Nick: Because…it's a fact?
Norm: A fact?
Nick: F.A.C.T. Fact.
Norm: So, you're saying that I should believe it because...it's...true. That's that's your argument.
Nick: It is true.
Next week... how drugs have helped fund Saddam's WMDs. How do we know? What's the evidence? Nothing more than that a Cheney look alike says "it is true."
Of course it's true. It all goes through the CIA first, though. :)
But, yes, it has a very "these aren't the droids you're looking for" feel to it.
I'd almost agree with Justin ("these aren't the droids..."), except for one detail: they're WAY too paternalizing. Trust us, we're the authority here, we know better than you. No such authority structure between Obi and the troopers :)
Guys... they're basically saying that drugs are bad, you shouldn't do them, and buying them funds terrorists, criminals, and shady people.
If you're trying to argue that drugs are good for society, I think it's going to be a lot harder.
You may want to argue that legalizing drugs will help reduce crime and drug abuse. That doesn't nullify anything in these ads though.
Ah, yes. Drugs bad.
<sarcasm>
Please, Mr Schizophrenic, stop taking your antipsychotics. It is bad for you and you are funding terrorists. Oh Mr Cancer sufferer, please stop taking that Zofran. It is bad for you and it is supporting criminals. Let's arrest everyone who buys or serves alcohol - they are supporting shady people. And let's lockup everyone who drink caffeinated coffee or soda pop.
</sarcasm>
Drugs, when used inappropriately, can be bad for you. So can water. You should use care when taking any substance to follow the instructions. This means command sense things like - don't operate heavy machinery while taking drugs (this includes antihistimines).
If we are going to outlaw everything that might help criminals, then let's outlaw taxes. Paying taxes funds criminals and shady people (School of the Americas aka the "Western Hemisphere Institute for Security Cooperation" is paid for by U.S. taxes).
But Marijuana is extremely safe (no known cases of human overdose), is not physically addictive, can easily be grown in the home (thus removing the support of the criminal element), and is less destructive than alcohol or tobacco. Yet it is illegal.
They're not arguing anything. They're stating as fact, and they're doing so in a very patronizing manner. It's not a question of what they're arguing for, but the simple fact that they are NOT arguing about it.
Like I said in a previous post (in less polite terms), they either believe that they need to dumb down their message, or actually DO need to dumb down their message, so it will be accepted by the target audience. There's no place for argument in this type of message. Even their format makes it incredibly clear that there is no room for discussion. Just read the transcript for the "complicated" ad.
Drug illegalization funds terrorism.
If I could walk into Wal-Mart and buy Bayer Heroin, all those evil criminals/terrorists would be out of jobs. Incidentally, we managed to colonize the new world, defeat the British and establish the United States of America, meet our 'manifest destiny' of expanding all the way to the Pacific, embark on the industrial revolution, and become one of the most prosperous nations in the history of the planet... all while anyone could walk into the local grocery store and buy opium by the pound. I don't think things have improved much since the Harrison Act changed that in 1915. Unless you're a drug dealer, of course... lotsa money. The national debt is sky high, we haven't had a new state since 1959, the unemployment rate is ridiculously high, and we constantly have terrorists out to get us. Remember, correlation does equal causation when you're arguing about drug policy.
Trevor, the problem is not that we are trying to argue for the legalization of drugs. The problem is that the US government gives us these moral scenarios without any logic to back up their position, using simple repetition to make their "point". While the liberal side of the argument has numerous well-formed arguments against the government's position, they choose not to respond to any of them, instead expecting us to simply suspend our reasoning skills to accept their "F. A. C. T.". It is both an insult to the intelligence of the American citizen, and somewhat of a silent acknowledgment that they have no reasonable counter-argument to the "pro-drug" position.
Well, on the upside, it makes a perfect setup for anyone with the will and money to riff off of:
Norm: (raising glass) Well, if drugs fund terrorists, alcohol funds gangsters, right?
Nick: What? Gangsters haven't been involved in alcohol since the thirties.
Norm: Since it was illegal?
Cut. You have the remainder of your 30-second ad to put forth a brief (actual) argument in white-on-black type. It's incredibly easy to turn this angle back upon itself, my blessing (and free use of the idea) to anyone who makes the effort.
I really like Ikura's idea. Htis is my first viewing of the blog, and there should many more of us from the Dean campaign starting tomorrow. Cheers to a great community. It will be fun stopping in!
~TonyZ(a)ishcon.org
I only see one problem with this idea. I believe something like this has been tried before in the last couple of years. The commercial had been completed, a few TV stations (or networks?) had accepted to air it, and then at the last second they retracted, and flat out refused any air time. I don't remember the specifics about this, does anyone remember anything about it?
Great idea btw. Too bad more people won't hear this type of argument...
I would like to see Dean's comments about the Drug war in his blog. He has been quite wishy washy about defining a stance and has opposed efforts in Vermont to come up with a more sensible drug policy.
"So ignorance is knowledge?"
"Yeah."
"Ignorance?"
"Yep. Big Bro' told me so."
"What about O'Brian?"
"Yeah, he said it too."
"So rational thinking..."
"Supports that Goldy sheep guy, who's with the Eurasians."
"Don't you mean East Asians?"
"No, that was last week. Er, wasn't. Never. Double-plus-damn."
Im really not siure about this news....It moght possible it is only a rumour that It is an anti-legalization ad...
Rolex Masterpiece watchesmade with swiss movement ! so cheap and high quality ! accept paypal ,and 14 days money back without reason !
Very interesting writeup thank you.
We are almost same l buy hero gold evel in the game.
I was very excited after runescape money getting the sword.