cannabisnews.com: Gore Gets Weeded Out Gore Gets Weeded Out Posted by FoM on January 29, 2000 at 11:23:41 PT By Barbara Fischkin, Columnist, Fox News Online Source: Fox News I'm sure a lot of Americans would like to ignore this business about Al Gore being an (alleged) daily pot head. I can understand that. It's a tattletale told by a former close friend. It reeks too much of Linda Tripp and betrayal. I, though, am very reluctant to let this all pass, swept away as an extra prize for winning in Iowa. It's not that I care whether Al Gore smoked every day or not, although that is at the core of the disagreement. (He's already admitted to smoking period, albeit "rarely and infrequently"). No, what bothers me more is the reason he—and his team—gives for stopping. Listen to Gore spokesman Chris Lehane, as quoted in Salon.com: "This is old news. (Gore) brought it up himself in 1987 and was definitive at that time that he's never used it since entering public office ... He's said he used it in college, used it in Vietnam and used it in Tennessee, but definitely hasn't used it since entering public service." Never used it since entering public office. Hasn't used it since entering public service. A lot of us knew people like that in college. They'd smoke with you all the time, trying to be one of the gang, never letting on they were only visiting your planet ... perhaps because they didn't know this themselves. Then one day they get all sanctimonious, hold up a hand, shake a head, and close the door in your face. "I can't smoke with you any more because I've decided to go to law school." They always said something like that. Like all sudden conversions, this one used to drive me crazy. These people implied that all deeds B.C. (before conversion) were meaningless. They demonstrated a decidedly cynical outlook: I'm stopping not because it's wrong, against the law, not good for me, or I don't like doing it any more. I'm stopping so that I don't get caught being a pot smoking lawyer. Or a pot smoking president. I'm also not sure I buy the way Gore characterizes his marijuana use. He says he smoked "rarely and infrequently" but on two continents, during three different periods of his life. I don't know how he was raised but that would not have flown with my mother, whose view of rare and infrequent use of marijuana meant that you smoked it once at summer camp after an older counselor told you it would keep the bugs away. Anything more than that constituted plain old, regular, out-and-out drug use. It was a well-respected reporter at Newsweek who interviewed Gore's old "friend." Still, Newsweek pulled the story, a book excerpt. It's been reported that the magazine is concerned about its veracity and focus and is ruminating on what to do with it. While they dither, there is something I would very much like to see. I'm not as concerned about which candidates used drugs, as I am about how they hold their artificial substances. Who wants a president who acts like a jerk when he gets high? I'd like to see all the candidates who have admitted to smoking marijuana sit around with one another and light up. They could do it wearing Mick Jagger-brand clothing. (It's said that Jagger wants to register his name as a trademark). A cute touch, don't you think? And the profits could go to charity. The other thing I would like to see is John Warnecke, the former-Gore-friend-snitch. I want to know if he's as unattractive as Linda Tripp used to be. If so, will his looks —every wrinkle and wattle on his face—be examined under a microscope? It would be nice to see that happen to a male media villain for a change, even if there is free plastic surgery at the end of the tunnel. Barbara Fischkin Columnist, Fox News Online I'd like to see all the candidates who have admitted to smoking marijuana sit around with one another and light up! Published: January 27, 2000 E-Mail: comments foxnews.com © Associated Press.© Reuters Ltd. © News Digital Media 2000. Related Articles:Gore Drug Use Question Leads to More Questions - 1/28/200http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4508.shtmlGore: Smoking or Being Dope? - 1/27/2000http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4499.shtmlOne Other Journalist Recalls Gore's Drug Use - 1/25/2000http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4471.shtmlReports of Gore Pot Use Raise Complex Questions - 1/25/2000http://www.cannabisnews.com/news/thread4470.shtml Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help Comment #3 posted by kaptinemo on January 29, 2000 at 21:14:08 PT Good to see you're back, M-O-G I was afraid that Our Fearless Leader (AAAk! Ptui!) had sent you to some godforsaken hole. He just loves sending our young men and women in uniform in harm's way for no good reason. Unless it's to feather the nests of his good friends.Speaking of feathering nests, here's a site you might find of interest. I don't completely agree with everything the gentleman has to say, however, he makes a damning case for the Hemp Conspiracy Hypothesis. It also makes you wonder if anything similar is happening today, hmmm? Shadow of the Swastika [ Post Comment ] Comment #2 posted by military officer guy on January 29, 2000 at 16:43:07 PT amen you're exactly right kaptinemo...i'm waiting for the same thing..reporters to ask the tough questions, but they won't... [ Post Comment ] Comment #1 posted by kaptinemo on January 29, 2000 at 12:42:36 PT Fischkin misses the point The Press in this country very often behaves like my neighbor's toy poodle. It makes a lot of annoying racket, barking as if it is some dangerous creature to be feared. But it quickly rolls on it's back as soon as it is petted and talked to in a soothing fashion. I'm afraid, that for all of Ms. Fischkins bark, she rolls with the best of them.Because she is, like so many bulldog mouth/puppydog ass jounalists (long on bark, short on teeth) she is not asking the really hard questions, and not pursuing the matter until Gore, Bush and their allies provide a substantive answer.The aforementioned point being, she should not just be worried about the apparent change in attitude evinced by these opportunistic rats. She should be more worried about having another hypocrite in the White House.She is not asking the important questions. Such as do they believe that people should go to jail for doing what they did? (Whether they bought it, sold it, or simply held it in their hands, they committed a felony and are as guilty as those they have sent to prison.)When journalists finally get up the courage to make like the tenacious bulldogs that they tell themselves they are, and ask those hard questions, then I'll pay them respect. Until then, I'll just attribute this latest bit of lukewarm reportage to be what it is; the yapping of an annoying little dog of no consequence. [ Post Comment ] Post Comment Name: Optional Password: E-Mail: Subject: Comment: [Please refrain from using profanity in your message] Link URL: Link Title: