Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
100 words for 100 days: submit your 100 word essay and get published on AlterNet
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

DrugReporter

Millions More for a Failed Anti-Drug Propaganda Campaign? Ridiculous!

By Paul Armentano, AlterNet. Posted March 16, 2007.


It's no wonder that a $2 billion anti-drug campaign which included suggestions that smoking pot supports al Qaeda and causes pregnancy completely failed. So why are Republicans throwing another $130 million at it?
Advertisement

Indiana House Republican Mark Souder, a White House point man in Congress for its propaganda war against drugs, recently took to the airwaves to defend one of the Bush administration's sacred cows: its National Youth Anti-Drug Media Campaign.

If you've had access to a television or a newspaper over the past few years, you're probably familiar with the federal ad campaign. It's the one that's spent over $2 billion since 1998 to produce public-service announcements implying that smoking pot supports al-Qaida and may make you pregnant, among other dubious anti-drug messages. So dubious, in fact, that the campaign has flopped miserably among its target audience. Of course, this fact matters not to the White House, which recently demanded $130 million to run the ads through 2008 -- a 31 percent increase over current funding levels.

Speaking recently with MSNBC's Tucker Carlson, Souder vehemently defended the administration's decision to increase spending for the much-maligned campaign, stating, "The fact is, I believe in results and conservatives believe in results." That said, the results couldn't be any worse.

Consider this:

  • A 2002 review by the research firm Westat Inc. and the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania found "no statistically significant decline in marijuana use or improvement in beliefs and attitudes about marijuana use" attributable to the media campaign. Authors of the report -- which was sponsored by the federal government -- later told Congress that the negative results were among the worst in the history of large-scale public communication campaigns.
  • A 2003 performance assessment by the White House Office of Management and Budget criticized the Media Campaign for failing to achieve any tangible goals or objectives. There exists "no evidence that paid media messages have a direct effect on youth drug-related behavior," the report concluded.
  • An August Government Accountability Office (GAO) evaluation reported: "[E]xposure to the advertisements generally did not lead youth to disapprove of using drugs and may have promoted perceptions among exposed youth that others' drug use was normal. ... [E]xposure to the campaign did not prevent initiation of marijuana use and had no effect on curtailing current users' marijuana use."
  • A January Texas State University study published in the journal Addictive Behaviors reported that teens are more likely to express their intent to use marijuana after viewing the Feds' anti-pot ads. Investigators concluded, "It appears that ... anti-marijuana public statement announcements used in national anti-drug campaigns in the U.S. produce immediate effects opposite [of those] intended by the creators of the campaign."

Souder's response? "Just because some study comes to some conclusion that the liberals doing the study wanted to have, doesn't mean the study is accurate. Results are results."

Indeed. And in this case, the results are in. There is nothing to be gained by exaggerating claims of marijuana's alleged harms. (In the same MSNBC interview, Souder claimed -- falsely -- that thousands of Americans die every year from the occasional toke.) On the contrary, by overstating pot's potential dangers, America's policymakers and law enforcement community undermine their credibility and ability to effectively educate the public of the risks that may be associated with cannabis or with more dangerous drugs. This is the reason why the Feds' multibillion dollar media campaign, and the government's drug 'war' efforts overall, have consistently fizzled.

Rather than continue down this failed path, federal officials like Rep. Souder ought to take a page from the government's far more successful campaigns discouraging drunken driving and teen tobacco smoking, both of which have fallen dramatically since the mid-1990s. America has not achieved these results by arbitrarily outlawing the use of alcohol or tobacco, or by targeting and arresting adults who use these products responsibly, but through honest, health- and science-based education campaigns.

Until we as a nation apply these same principles to our educational efforts regarding cannabis, there will be little change in either teens' perceptions of pot or their patterns of marijuana use, regardless of how much money Souder and Congress spend.

An earlier version of this article appeared in the Fort Wayne News-Sentinel.

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: propaganda, drug policy, white house campaign

Paul Armentano is the senior policy analyst for the NORML Foundation in Washington, DC.


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
The Bush junta is all about belief
Posted by: HeroesAll on Mar 16, 2007 2:59 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Souder vehemently defended the administration's decision to increase spending for the much-maligned campaign, stating, "The fact is, I believe in results and conservatives believe in results."

And all the better if there are no results, because we get a chance to believe in 'em all the harder. A workout for the old belief muscles is what us preservatives are all about.


Investigators concluded, "It appears that ... anti-marijuana public statement announcements used in national anti-drug campaigns in the U.S. produce immediate effects opposite [of those] intended by the creators of the campaign."

So, the ads may be increasing dope-smoking in teens? Well done, Bush government. You get a gold star for that one.


Souder's response? "Just because some study comes to some conclusion that the liberals doing the study wanted to have, doesn't mean the study is accurate. Results are results."

Translation: anyone who disagrees with, or flat-out contradicts, me is a biased commienazifaglovinlibrul. I know the results because I declared 'em before we started.

And results are still results, I see. Good-oh.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Well, if the GOP has no intentions of abolish the DEA, then you should know their plans by now.
Posted by: maxpayne on Mar 16, 2007 3:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The DEA has no problem with Viagra that causes serious health hazards and possibly death and yet they put no control over it. But this same DEA is hell bent on outlawing non-harmful medicines such as Cannibis. Neither the Libertarians nor Conservatives are calling for an abolition of the DEA. Surprisingly, even the liberals are not stepping up to the plate on this matter for silly fears that it'll somehow causes America to lose the "war on drugs" as if it hasn't been lost already. Of course the fundies on Capital Hill love Al Queda or they wouldn't have been supporting them since the 80s.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» War on Drugs: An All Around Winner! Posted by: Windwhistler
» From Another Libertarian Posted by: aussidawg
Truthiness
Posted by: colinmeister on Mar 16, 2007 3:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Souder is telling truth from the gut.

I don't know the reasons for his shameless cover up of the government's desire to waste tax dollars, but I wish someone would dig a little and find out who is benefiting financially from this expenditure.

It would also be interesting to compare the effects of legal alcohol and illegal cannabis on unwanted pregnancies. I doubt smoking pot is any more likely to make a woman remove her panties than a few drinks.

I read that the Taliban were slowing opium poppy farming in Afghanistan when they were in power, but now that the good old USA is in charge, the supply of heroin from that country is back up to previous levels. War on drugs? I don't think so.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Truthiness Posted by: j3ffy
It's...
Posted by: adp3d on Mar 16, 2007 4:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...the 130 million dollars, duh!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It's... Posted by: pete ess
harry anslinger, andrew mellon, and randolph hearst
Posted by: WhatNow? on Mar 16, 2007 4:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
would be proud of souder.

Same old propaganda I saw in 80s like the egg in the frying pan. One partnership for a drug free amerika commercial was removed once it was found that the brain waves of a teenager smoking pot were actually a monkey's brain waves that was essentially smothered with a mask that was pumped with so much reefer smoke it would have cause any mammal brain damage.

Another particularly disgusting aspect of the partnership for a drug free amerika's programs was that some of their biggest donors were Philip Morris, RJR Reynolds, Miller Brewing, and Anhueser Busch.

I am glad this article mentions the fact that exagerating the dangers of pot make teens less likely to believe anything the government has to say.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A good read ...
Posted by: kelt65 on Mar 16, 2007 5:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Everyone should read this short essay ...

The The War on Drugs as the health of the State

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Interesting article. Posted by: WhatNow?
Addicted People Need A Doctor- Not A Jail Cell
Posted by: NoPCZone on Mar 16, 2007 6:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Decriminalization of Marijuana and drastically reduced sentences for possession of small amounts of other drugs, combined with stiff sentences for distribution and free treatment for addicted people will cost less and accomplish more than the heavy handed mess we have now. An addict will get their fix whatever it takes unless given a reasonable chance to get clean. Addiction is a medical and psychological problem and should be treated as such. Treatment in prison should also be instituted, as many come out of jail/prison more addicted than when they come in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Yes, but... Posted by: vangogh69
ABOUT FUNDING
Posted by: VZEQICVA on Mar 16, 2007 8:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Let's cut off funding to the media for useless ads. But funding to young people buying this stuff is another matter. They have some very expensive habits. How do they afford themselves? Exactly where does the money come from. Grandma? I'm serious. Getting drunk is expensive. So the booze is paid for, 'treatment ' is not cheap and so it goes. I can't afford their life style. This crap is 50 yrs. old and getting worse. Tired of it. Thank,s ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is all about wasting money
Posted by: thoswatson on Mar 16, 2007 8:05 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This government has initiated many programs designed to waste money (the most blatant and atrocious of which is the illegal war in Iraq.) The government needs to waste the money which it milks from the middle class in order to ensure the political marginalization of the middle class; thus ensuring the sanctity of the ruling elite. Has anyone here read 1984 ? None of these programs are real, they are merely devices through which the government and emerging ruling elite preserve themselves. As a nation and as humans we are screwed completely unless we can realize and reject what is going on politically. A nation of sheep is lead to the slaughter as such.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They don't want to win a war on drug!
Posted by: Krain61 on Mar 16, 2007 8:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If they have a program that doesn't deter people from smoking pot then I believe that's the program they want anyhow. Think of the jobs lost if they actually got people to stop and think of the money cities and states would loose if there program did work. If everyone stopped doing drugs millions of people would be out of work. Gaurds in prisons,DEA,courts wouldn't have enough work. They could then combine courts which means less judges.
Hea I wish every stopped for if nothing else just 6 months and put them out of a job.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

My take
Posted by: jroth420 on Mar 16, 2007 8:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The problem that I have with the government's ridiculous ad campaign is simple. Anyone that has ever used marijuana, or for that matter knows anyone who has, knows that the adds are insane. The drug doesn't affect your judgement so bad that you "somehow" end up pregnant or that you pull out your dad's pistol and go on an in home shooting spree! And as for supporting terrorism, a good percentage of the herb smoked in this country is grown in here, Canada and Mexico. Hardly bastions of fundamentalist terrorism.

I agree with the point that the article makes. If you want to educate people about a drug's truly harmful effects (hey even a stoner will admit it's not good for their lungs) then do that. People respond much better to honesty than they do "Reefer Madness" that they know, from their own life experiences, is simply not true.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

130 Million Dollars???
Posted by: dover23 on Mar 16, 2007 9:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Think of how many phony progressive websites could be created for that much money!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: 130 Million Dollars??? Posted by: Idunno
"So why are Republicans throwing another $130 million at it?"
Posted by: Idunno on Mar 16, 2007 9:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Simple... Greed and corruption. It gets them votes. The elite don't really want us off drugs. We might sober up and see the writing on the wall... "Capitalism is corrupt and injust"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "Capitalism is corrupt and injust" Posted by: psychochurch
Constitutional Amendment to Ban Consenual Crime Laws
Posted by: rfrancis@godisdead.com on Mar 16, 2007 10:02 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This country, if it truly respects and believes in personal freedom, needs to pass a constitutional amendment banning consensual crime laws.

We should all be allowed to buy and consume any substances we desire.

If we don't have the freedom to decide what to put into our own bodies, how can we possibly believe that we are a free people?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Propaganda KILLS ....Thanks to Mark Souder[R-Indiana]
Posted by: picket on Mar 16, 2007 10:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Mr Souder should be more well informed because he is the ranking Republican on the committee that oversees Federal Drug Policy.

Appearing on the Tucker Carlson show in February 2007, Souder said that smoking Cannabis is not that much different from doing drug lines of cocaine or smoking crack in terms of the dangers.

Well there ......What does that say to our CHILDREN???? The real danger to our CHILDREN is Souder's well scripted remarks. Mark Souder puts his career and Politics before telling the Truth.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

They don't WANT to "win" the "war"
Posted by: Crazy H on Mar 16, 2007 11:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They'd have to go find a new boogey man.

Since they've already made certain recreational drugs illegal, saner heads are reluctant to step forward for fear of prosecution. It's a perfect scam.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Fear keeps people in-line
Posted by: zooeyhall on Mar 16, 2007 11:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It all about fear mongering. The new right-wing in this country wants to instill an overiding fear in every citizen--fear of terrorists, fear of drugs, fear of sex, fear of gays, fear of whatever. Then they pull the second punch by setting up a "saviour": whether it be law enforcement figures, the Republican party, Jesus, the Bible, etc. etc.

They know exactly how to plug into the psyche of the religion mind-set that afflicts so many in our country. I live in rural Nebraska, and you ought to see how the goobers out here plug into this stuff. "We gots to fear all them ter'ists 'n homos n' drug pushers 'n irakees 'cos our president sez he will save us from 'em!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Follow...the...MONEY!!!
Posted by: WWMD on Mar 16, 2007 1:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The administration's request to increase funding is perfectly understandable:
1) The government's main job is to protect big business.
2) Recent news reports have reliably discredited the government's (read that as, "the pharmaceutical industry's") claims that marijuana is dangerous/deadly/medically useless.
3) People who support the medical use of marijuana now have more potent arguements than ever for it's legalization.
4) People who oppose recreational drug use must now reconsider their moral opposition to a substance that heals.
5) The pharmaceutical industry is worried that the public might pressure Congress to legalize a medication that they cannot make any money off of.
6) The government's main job is to protect big business. ( It really does need to be said twice.)
7) The government is doing its job by spending tax dollars on useless ads to try to delay the day when the public will demand nationwide medical marijuana.
8) The politicians who run the government (for the benefit of big business) benefit by running anti-marijuana ads because it motivates the pharmaceutical industry to pour in campaign contributions.

And let's not forget, folks~
If marijuana was legalized for medical use, Congress would have a hell of a time refusing to legalize industrial hemp. Thus, if the government (ie. Big Business) loses the War on Drugs, Big Business would also lose the War to Maintain Ridiculous Oil Profit$!

It's always easy to understand what the government is up to if you just remember those Three Magic Words:
Follow...the...MONEY!!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

War on drugs?
Posted by: fedupw/bush on Mar 16, 2007 1:53 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Do you really think" this war on drugs "couldn't be stopped if THEY wanted it stopped ! They are making to much money on ALL drugs to stop ANY of them! They didn't get rid of all the poppies when they went to war in Afganistan ,& I don't feel the drug cartell in Mexico is part of "the terrorist who were supossed to have attacted us ! They were in business long BEFORE Bush & Co. ( the REAL terrorist ) decided to go after the Iraq leader ,who was no longer of any use to them ! There is a much larger group out there,that have a bigger plan for controlling everybody ! What better way, than to keep as many as possible ON DRUGS, for as long as they can. Get them hooked as early as you can and you can control them better ! PEOPLE we must get this bunch out of office & into JAIL as soon as possible !

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You know...
Posted by: vangogh69 on Mar 16, 2007 3:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It amazes me that so much paper is spent on such phony b.s. while things that COULD use some more money (like oh, say, I dunno, PUBLIC EDUCATION) get funding cut! Incredible! I'd like to believe that the majority of the US population believes the reason why marijuanna is banned is due to outdated ideology and demagoguery and not any PROVEN harms. The fact that tobacco and alcohol, two substances which have been linked to deaths, are legal proves that the reason why we can't light up is because some assholes in the Tobacco Industry and governement don't want us to. As far as drug propaganda, has it EVER been shown to work??? Hardly.

Like I said before, the country is run by psychopaths and the insane, so this shit is to be expected.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Horrible Commercials
Posted by: hotlipsin61 on Mar 16, 2007 4:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Our government spends all this money to tell us what's bad for us, eh? These 30-second spots are just as horrible as these army commercials that constantly bombard us on the airwaves. They're good for a laugh.
No wonder this country is in arrears: our priorities are backward. The government's philosophy is backward and dated for another time area. Drug use will continue and more people will be sent to jail and cops will harass medical marijuana dispensaries (as we have seen in Los Angeles in recent weeks).
Why can't our country be more like the Netherlands or another progressive country? The conservatives will have a meltdown. We'll keep producing those awful anti-drug commercials. A joint never killed anyone, but liquor has! Come to Los Angeles where we have liquor stores in abundance, especially in the south side and in poorer areas.
Finally, that money could be better spent to build schools, hospitals, repair highways and create (non-war) jobs but we know that won't happen.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Horrible Commercials Posted by: richholland
You MUST NOT "Alter Your Consciousness"
Posted by: sofla100 on Mar 16, 2007 5:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Beyond speculation that drugs "negatively impact society," is also a very real fear, I believe, by those "in charge" of a positive impact at least some drug use could have on society. Perhaps if people got "loosened up" on marijuana, they might not "be quite so conservative." Or if they used psilocybin. mescaline or LSD, they might have "mystical experiences." Then, who knows, they might not want to spend their lives like the herds of society, chasing after money and fame. However, the major "allowable" altered state of awareness, the one "sanctioned by society," is one not that liberating at all. The drunken stupor. Perfectly allowed by society, even encouraged, to the point that even our current President is known to engage in it. Or, and also allowed, the ones that "Big Pharma" has endorsed. A little Zoloft, and Prozac please. But, no worry, none of these drugs is going to "radicalize" you very much, in fact, they will mostly just help you accept the status quo (and forget about your miserable life for awhile). Finally, it is well known that drugs like Marijuana and LSD are far less toxic than conventional cigarettes, but, apparently, they are potentially far more dangerous to those who guard the linchpins of our society, and of course, we must continuously wage war against them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

kafka
Posted by: marchpet on Mar 17, 2007 4:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The "War on Drugs" was never about drugs or persuading people to stop using them. It was and is a scape-goating exercise designed to rally the conservative base by filling their heads with imaginary fears and a sense of moral outrage. What better scam than to link the marginalisation of a mostly liberal, or young, or black section of the population with the other so-called "War"-- that on "Terror" (Iraq). Funny how these add campaigns always peak in the period leading up to an election. Ever since Nixon the Republicans have used Federal money and the DEA as part of their campaign machine.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another "Faith-based Initiative"
Posted by: Justin Lawn on Mar 17, 2007 9:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Souder must this this is another "Faith-based Initiative."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's a good thing to keep youth from
Posted by: SamFox on Mar 17, 2007 11:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
taking drugs. No problem. But the same youths are laughing at the ads the gov puts out.

I just saw last night a Penn & Teller's B***S*** segment that exposes some of the gov lies & failed policies.

Please remember the MSM media that supports & lies about the lost & deadly war on drugs is the very same MSM that brings us global warming & peak oil. It was the MSM of the day that gave us Reefer Madness that lead to the stupid war on drugs. If they lie about cannabis & hemp...

Check out LEAP (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition)
and JackHerer.com

SamFox

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

libertyordeath
Posted by: libertyordeath on Mar 17, 2007 4:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Souder,Soufer,Twofer,whatever the hell it's name is,needs an enema.A KingKong sized one.We need an idiot free zone in Washington.Why do we keep on electing these useless jackasses?We are sheep!Over the years I have voted Communist party,Socialist party,anything but parasitic democrat or republican.If they wanted to do good they would serve 4 years and get out.Why 4 years?Because unfortunately,the stupid masses who keep electing these idiots would never vote for them again.Because they actually did the right thing in those 4 years.Like I said ,people are sheep,afraid of change.Why?Because the missing links are among us.Don't look in the ground.Vote for change.It won'thurt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Too busy slomming!
Posted by: Madam Hatter on Mar 20, 2007 12:06 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Sorry, couldn't read all of this. I was out "SLOM"*ming with my friends. ;)

* Stands for: "Sticking Leaches On Myself"

Is that not THE stupidest commercial you've ever seen?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

marihuana legal in the Netherlands
Posted by: richholland on Mar 20, 2007 9:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Marihuana and hashish are legalised in the Netherlands.
Of course no smoking at all is healthier but the strange thing is that problemaddiction became lower.
The use of heroine and cocaine is only a little bit lower.
And it is not allowed to sell marihuana and alcohol in the coffeshops.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]