On one day, the Denver City Council can be found panicking over a marijuana initiative that "sends the wrong message":

City Council members each took turns bashing Citizens for a Safer Denver’s ballot initiative to make marijuana the city’s lowest law enforcement priority. The City Council unanimously agreed that the measure either sends the wrong message to the community or will be unenforceable. Voters will decide on the measure this November. [Denver Daily News]

On another, it can be found renewing a sponsorship deal with Coors Brewing Company:

A group that is calling for the Denver Police Department to make marijuana its lowest enforcement priority yesterday called for the City Council to hold a public hearing concerning a bill that would renew the city’s partnership with Coors Brewing Company.
…

“Once and for all, the Council needs to explain why it is necessary to punish adults for using marijuana in order to send the right message to children, yet somehow it’s no problem to have our city officially partner with an alcohol company to promote alcohol use to all who attend these events, including children,” said Mason Tvert, executive director of Citizens for a Safer Denver.

Good question, Mason. City Council President Michael Hancock, a vehement marijuana opponent, explains:

"It's not that we’re promoting the alcohol as much as we’re promoting the lesser burden on the taxpayer by receiving financial resources."

Well, that just makes so much sense. Oddly, however, Hancock's own argument becomes unintelligible to him when framed in the context of marijuana. See, Michael, it's not that we're promoting marijuana as much as we're promoting the lesser burden on everyone by not waging a brutal stupid war on each other everyday.

The rank hypocrisy of opposition to marijuana reform is seldom revealed with such brilliant transparency. The defective mental processes at work here are truly a marvel of modern psychology.

Milo Bryant at the Colorado Springs Gazette is so impressed with what the Drug Czar has accomplished, he wants to create a similar office to stop people from being so damned fat:

The country needs somebody qualified to help whip our butts into shape. That somebody would have the power to command, influence and draw resources from various aspects of the government to help us get in better shape.

This person, with our help, would lay out a comprehensive plan to help fight childhood obesity and, on a grander scale, obesity in general.

The United States needs an obesity czar, akin to John P. Walters, the director of the Office of the National Drug Control Policy — our drug czar.

Um, the drug war attacks people. It's unscrupulous. We need the government to attack less people, not more. I'm not sure Milo Bryant really understands what ONDCP advocates. Basically, it's a two-pronged approach:

1. Arrest as many people as possible
2. Exaggerate the government's role in activities other than arresting people

I'm just not sure any of this would carry over very well into the arena of trying to make people healthy. Would store clerks be deputized to identify customers suspected of planning unhealthy meals by flagging suspicious combinations of ingredients? Would students be subject to random non-punitive "weigh-ins," including parental notification and referral to a weight-reduction counselor? Would children found in possession of unapproved foods be denied access to federally subsidized athletic programs?

Let's get real. Childhood obesity is probably caused by the drug war somehow, so if we really want to make a difference, we must attack the problem at its roots. It's time these losers started worrying more about what comes out of their mouths than what goes into ours.