As I had some precious time to waste this morning, I went to Facebook (imo one of the most pleasant time wasters going) and scrolled. I found a somewhat simplistic graphic image that gave me a chuckle for several reasons. While I agreed with the overall sentiment, whoever the author was made an embarrassing mistake (at least, a mistake that would have embarrassed me) and I thought I could upgrade its appearance a bit.
Here’s the image I found:
And here it is after a half hour of tinkering:
The reason it took so long to fix is that the word “Prohibition” was misspelled twice, both in the big word and in the smaller caption above. Those tiny letters were a bitch to cut out and rearrange. There is no spell check I know of that will correct images.
So now it is at least spelled correctly. Beyond that, I think the sentiment suffers a bit from over-generalization. First, liberals do not all want to ban guns. My congressman — John Dingell — is a notable and laudatory exception. Not only does he not want to ban guns, but much to his credit, he is on record as against the Obama gun control plan. I say good for Dingell. America needs more liberals like him.
Moreover, by no means are all liberals in favor of legalizing drugs. If they were, then by now the DEA would have been disbanded (as it should be).
It is also incorrect to characterize all conservatives as being against drug relegalization. I know many who think the War on Drugs is an unconstitutional farce. Sure, I wish there were more of them, but in time that may change.
Yet despite its overreaching, for those who like simplifying things and don’t mind generalizations, the graphic makes a good point.
Comments
6 responses to “Improving on “PROHIBTION””
What passes for a “conservative” movement has certainly ossified over the recent decade or two. Remember when William Buckley, Milton Friedman et al devoted an entire issue of National Review to drug legalization? Can you imagine Jonah Goldberg and company doing the same? (Jonah Goldberg – textbook example of a boring young fart. NR took a big, fat, stinky dump with Buckley’s demise)
And John McCain replaced Barry Goldwater. A coreless publicity hound for a principled conservative/ libertarian.
What does “conservative” mean, anyway? What are they conserving? The 1930’s? 1890’s? Council of Nicaea? 1st century AD? Old stone age?
The graphic memorializes a sentiment I have been expressing for a while. I do know a number of conservatives who fit the profile.
Liberals might want to legalize drugs but their politicians surely don’t.
What would have been more unpopular? Obamacare or legalizing marijuana?
Hell, why not throw legalizing marijuana in on page 563?
Would the people freaking out about the loss of freedom and huge new bureaucracy in charge of our lives really have freaked out one bit more over legalized pot?
They like the war on drugs just fine.
Washington State and Colorado say that the politicians on the left are no longer in charge.
Also, the Republican pols in Washington State have effectively blocked any gun control legislation.
G_d grant us another William F. Buckley. And another Barry Goldwater. Sane conservatism? Is it possible anymore?
Bravo for the Pols in Washington State. Hope more react. (I suspect there ain’t gonna be any here either. Florida’s become almost as much happy with guns as Texas.) Almost.