The two articles I read were the LA Times “Schwarzenegger Urges a Study on Legalizing Marijuana Use” and the second was Esquire Magazine “Why Obama Really Might Decriminalize Marijuana” by John H. Richardson. I’m going to go over the statistics of how many people really felt hat marijuana should be legalized and who opposes to it.
The LA Times reports that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger strongly supports the legalization of marijuana. On his defense he states that he is trying to accumulate money for the state revenue. This article is written in a calm tone giving lots of information and factual statistics; “A Field Poll from April showed that 56 percent of the state’s registered voters in support of legalizing and taxing marijuana for recreational use to fill some of the budget deficit”. Gov. Schwarzenegger says just because he is talking about legalizing marijuana doesn’t mean it’s going to happen, he simply is letting the state know that he feels a study on this drug should be put to use. The article uses experts, Ethan Nadelmann the Executive Director of the Drug Policy Alliance said “There has been enormous fear at a political level about saying out loud and on the record that we should think about this”. Meaning that they are unsure if they want to actually legalized marijuana because of all the up roar and attention this matter is bringing.
The second article I took a look at was in Esquire Magazine titled “Why Obama Really Might Decriminalize Marijuana” writing by John H. Richardson. The article starts off with some humor the stoner community saying “Yes We Cannabis!” Now on a more serious note we are comparing and contrasting two Presidents in two different eras on two very important subjects. President Barack Obama (Marijuana) and President Franklin Delano Roosevelt (Prohibition). First let’s talk about FDR a man who saved the banking system in his first seven days as president, Congress had already repealed Prohibition. The people of the US needed beer to be legalized, and legalizing beer would open up millions of jobs for US Citizens. Two days after the bill pass Milwaukee Brewers hired 600 words and then paid their taxes, before long the auto megacorp had been expediting their first $12 million virtue in delivery trucks, and the brewers were pouring tens of millions into new sprouts.
Obama told Rolling Stone Magazine that he believed in “shifting the paradigm”, meaning he wants to shake things up. He says “I would start with nonviolent, first-time drug offenders, with the notion that we are imposing felonies on them or sending them to prison, where they can receive advanced degrees in criminality”. On the flip side he is not in favor of the legalization of marijuana.
Now ask yourself is there consistency between the title and the text? Why Obama Really might Decriminalize Marijuana. This is the title and it seems as if President Obama is going to be for the legalization, but in the text her clearly states that “he is against the legalization”. In my opinion there isn’t, they give you a title and my first assumption was that this is going to be a serious article that will state how President Obama is going to make marijuana legal. Is the title misleading? I would say it is more catchy title to pull readers in and have them take a look at it, so it’s not misleading just writing.
Secondly, you read the next line and it gives you a more humorous approach with the “Yes We Cannabis” taking from President Obama’s saying “Yes We Can”. Take sometime and think about this I’m reading the heading and its serious and then I read that line, what am I going to be reading about. My opinion on “Yes We Cannabis” it’s clever it fits the situation but no the article, if I’m a politician I don’t want to read any jokes in an article on a serious world wide matter.
The first article was based more on a serious stat giving article and the writer was calm when he was explaining his reasons, while in the second article the writer came across on the more humorous side and basically telling how FDR and President Obama were dealing with similar problems that deeply involve the country. I like both techniques in the writing schemes I can definitely see myself using both in future writings.
