Posts
For awhile now, I've been wanting to do a story on what people who are opposed to "Obamacare" think about the war on drugs.
In my mind, it follows that those who complain about the federal government overreaching it's authority when it comes to health care might also have a problem with Big Brother throwing people in jail for what they choose to do with their own bodies.
But, I need to talk to those people. And I need to do research. But with my pizza and donut gigs in full swing, I can't invest the amount of time I need to without some media organization funding the venture. I need to know, at least, that they may purchase my brilliant story if I write it. So, this morning I e-mailed one of the editors at the News-Leader with my idea. Here's my pitch:
Hello, this is Brian Brown. I'm the former associate editor of the Community Free Press, and the local freelance writer that recently penned the Shootout for Autism piece published in the N-L's Christian County editions.
I've got a question that only a journalist can answer: What do members of the Tea Party movement think about the nation's war on drugs?
With all the talk about enumerated powers in the run-up to the vote on Prop C, I began to wonder what strict Constitutionalists thought about the "war" that is costing the government -- according the director of Harvard's undergraduate studies -- $70 billion a year.
The prohibition of alcohol required Congress to amend the Constitution. Why didn't the prohibition of marijuana or other recreational drugs have to take a similar path?
It's no secret that Libertarians generally favor ending the war on drugs, but what do Tea Partiers think? It's a question I'd love to explore. Please let me know if you are interested; all I need is one week to put together a fantastic piece. Thanks for your time.
--Brian
Wish me luck.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To follow that analogy though, shouldn't a pro-life person be against the death penalty or a pro-choice person be in favor of the death penalty? I think how we might feel politically doesn't always follow a logical sequence or end. The same might be said for religion. We all try to show our individuality by making sure we cling to groups. Some people can see both sides of an issue and some people can only see one.
ReplyDeleteThere's a lot going on in your comment. It does seem like a pro-life person should be against the death penalty, but I suppose one could argue that unborn babies are innocent, while those found guilty by a jury of their peers and sentenced to death by a judge are not. I don't see that pro-choice people should be more or less obligated to be for the death penalty.
ReplyDeleteAnd you may be right that people are often inconsistent in their beliefs, but if that's true, that's interesting. They say politics make strange bedfellows, and it occurs to me that hippies and Tea Party people may have some common ground. Whether they do or don't, I think my story is interesting either way.