Writing in the New Yorker, David Remnick's interview, On and Off the Road With Barack Obama, is both fascinating and revealing. The interview is wide ranging covering a lot of different subject matter. I would like to focus on just a small portion of that interview on a subject near and dear to my heart, the legalization of marijuana. I have posted the pertinent section of the article below and will let you judge the President's words, recorded by Remick, as to whether or not the revelation here is extroardinary for yourselves.
"When I asked Obama about another area of shifting public opinion—the legalization of marijuana—he seemed even less eager to evolve with any dispatch and get in front of the issue. “As has been well documented, I smoked pot as a kid, and I view it as a bad habit and a vice, not very different from the cigarettes that I smoked as a young person up through a big chunk of my adult life. I don’t think it is more dangerous than alcohol.”
Is it less dangerous? I asked.
Obama leaned back and let a moment go by. That’s one of his moves. When he is interviewed, particularly for print, he has the habit of slowing himself down, and the result is a spool of cautious lucidity. He speaks in paragraphs and with moments of revision. Sometimes he will stop in the middle of a sentence and say, “Scratch that,” or, “I think the grammar was all screwed up in that sentence, so let me start again.”
Less dangerous, he said, “in terms of its impact on the individual consumer. It’s not something I encourage, and I’ve told my daughters I think it’s a bad idea, a waste of time, not very healthy.” What clearly does trouble him is the radically disproportionate arrests and incarcerations for marijuana among minorities. “Middle-class kids don’t get locked up for smoking pot, and poor kids do,” he said. “And African-American kids and Latino kids are more likely to be poor and less likely to have the resources and the support to avoid unduly harsh penalties.” But, he said, “we should not be locking up kids or individual users for long stretches of jail time when some of the folks who are writing those laws have probably done the same thing.” Accordingly, he said of the legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington that “it’s important for it to go forward because it’s important for society not to have a situation in which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law and only a select few get punished.”
As is his habit, he nimbly argued the other side. “Having said all that, those who argue that legalizing marijuana is a panacea and it solves all these social problems I think are probably overstating the case. There is a lot of hair on that policy. And the experiment that’s going to be taking place in Colorado and Washington is going to be, I think, a challenge.” He noted the slippery-slope arguments that might arise. “I also think that, when it comes to harder drugs, the harm done to the user is profound and the social costs are profound. And you do start getting into some difficult line-drawing issues. If marijuana is fully legalized and at some point folks say, Well, we can come up with a negotiated dose of cocaine that we can show is not any more harmful than vodka, are we open to that? If somebody says, We’ve got a finely calibrated dose of meth, it isn’t going to kill you or rot your teeth, are we O.K. with that?”"
Is it less dangerous? I asked.
Obama leaned back and let a moment go by. That’s one of his moves. When he is interviewed, particularly for print, he has the habit of slowing himself down, and the result is a spool of cautious lucidity. He speaks in paragraphs and with moments of revision. Sometimes he will stop in the middle of a sentence and say, “Scratch that,” or, “I think the grammar was all screwed up in that sentence, so let me start again.”
Less dangerous, he said, “in terms of its impact on the individual consumer. It’s not something I encourage, and I’ve told my daughters I think it’s a bad idea, a waste of time, not very healthy.” What clearly does trouble him is the radically disproportionate arrests and incarcerations for marijuana among minorities. “Middle-class kids don’t get locked up for smoking pot, and poor kids do,” he said. “And African-American kids and Latino kids are more likely to be poor and less likely to have the resources and the support to avoid unduly harsh penalties.” But, he said, “we should not be locking up kids or individual users for long stretches of jail time when some of the folks who are writing those laws have probably done the same thing.” Accordingly, he said of the legalization of marijuana in Colorado and Washington that “it’s important for it to go forward because it’s important for society not to have a situation in which a large portion of people have at one time or another broken the law and only a select few get punished.”
As is his habit, he nimbly argued the other side. “Having said all that, those who argue that legalizing marijuana is a panacea and it solves all these social problems I think are probably overstating the case. There is a lot of hair on that policy. And the experiment that’s going to be taking place in Colorado and Washington is going to be, I think, a challenge.” He noted the slippery-slope arguments that might arise. “I also think that, when it comes to harder drugs, the harm done to the user is profound and the social costs are profound. And you do start getting into some difficult line-drawing issues. If marijuana is fully legalized and at some point folks say, Well, we can come up with a negotiated dose of cocaine that we can show is not any more harmful than vodka, are we open to that? If somebody says, We’ve got a finely calibrated dose of meth, it isn’t going to kill you or rot your teeth, are we O.K. with that?”"
I find it remarkable as well as extraordinary that for the first time ever, a sitting US President has admitted publicly the belief that marijuana in and of itself is not 'dangerous'. That is as far a cry from the 'War On Drugs' as anyone in his position has been willing to go. Maybe there is hope for this country after all...just saying.
Your Musical Moment for today is one selected for a dear friend who mentioned to me yesterday that her favorite orchestral instrument is the Harp. The piece I have selected is from the Winner's concert of the 2013 Harp Concerto Competition at the Jacob's School of Music, Indiana University
Natalie Salzman (harpist) plays Joaquin Rodrigo's Concierto di Aranjuez (1941) with the Indiana University Concert Orchestra, conducted by Arthur Fagen. The concerto was originally written for classical guitar and arranged for harp by Rodrigo at the request of harpist Nicanor Zabaleta in 1974. This performance blends both versions, hoping to capture as much authenticity as possible of the original composition. In addition, you can catch the 1955 recording of Suite Bergamasque by Claude Debussy performed by Albert Ferber over on my tumblr.
Natalie Salzman (harpist) plays Joaquin Rodrigo's Concierto di Aranjuez (1941) with the Indiana University Concert Orchestra, conducted by Arthur Fagen. The concerto was originally written for classical guitar and arranged for harp by Rodrigo at the request of harpist Nicanor Zabaleta in 1974. This performance blends both versions, hoping to capture as much authenticity as possible of the original composition. In addition, you can catch the 1955 recording of Suite Bergamasque by Claude Debussy performed by Albert Ferber over on my tumblr.
Finally for today, it has been a while since I have featured delectable derrieres for your visual appreciation, so forthwith I present you with a bevy of beautiful butts in this edition of Bootylicious. You can also cruise and peruse the Hottie of the Day! over on my tumblr. Thanks for sharing a part of your day with me, see you again soon. Until next time as always, Enjoy!
No comments:
Post a Comment