WEED MY LIPS: THERE WILL BE NO DISCUSSION OF DRUG POLICY!

COULDN'T DO THAT. WOULDN'T BE PRUDENT.

[ P.S. Why won't Al Gore and that other presidential candidate just doob
the right thing? ]

In a book published this past spring, an Al Gore biographer proffered the
possibility that our Democratic presidential nominee and his wife Tipper
may have smoked dope together semi-regularly for the better part of the
Peace Decade. This, of course, is hardly earth-shattering news. How many
people who came of age back then didn't indulge on a semi-regular basis?

Wait. Thinking about it now, maybe George W didn't. Though he's been
explicit in countless interviews that he doesn't care to discuss his past
drug use, it has been widely suggested he may have preferred a toot over a
toke during his own particular halcyon years--chased, perhaps, by a
half-dozen warm 40s. One can only imagine what a charmer the Republican
nominee must have been in that condition.

Me, I'll take the toker every time. It's become easy, thanks to the Gore
family film shorts showcased at the Democratic Convention, to visualize a
younger Al and Tipper rolling up a couple of hefty doobs, throwing a Blind
Faith tape into the eight-track and taking to the Tennessee hills in the
old man's station wagon. You can picture it, can't you? The two of them
getting real silly, making out, riffing about their future, making out some
more, talking about public service, giggling as they passed the joint and
finishing their fun excursion by making out one last time.

Anyone who saw Tipper shake her groove thing at the Democratic National
Convention can tell this is a woman who has not lost touch with her earthy,
carefree years. This, alas, does not appear to be the case with husband
Albert. In fact, would it be the worst thing, if--under Tipper's
supervision, of course--the vice president paid a short visit to his
intemperate past?

He and the Tipster could escape to a Smoky Mountain resort, slap some
vintage Hendrix or Canned Heat into the CD player, stuff a modicum of weed
into a pipe and, well, let the earth move under their feet. Look, you have
to agree, the man could only benefit from a little unreality check.

Okay, so perhaps some Americans might feel uneasy at the notion of a White
House contender bending over a hash pipe. One need only think of the
reaction in the Bible Belt, or from voters in, say, Ocean County, N.J., to
a spaced-out Al Gore.

But I suspect the majority of lucid Americans would be drawn to a
presidential candidate who showed the chutzpah to launch a bare-knuckled
dialogue about drug use in America. It would be the first step in talking
truth about our most crushing affliction--an epidemic that's been shrouded
in deception and misinformation since the day Nancy Reagan first sputtered
the words "Just Say No."

That one utterly simple-minded slogan set the country's drug policies back
decades. It showed a nation more willing to condescend than deal in
complexities. With the advent of the "Just Say No" culture, the playing
field was fraudulently leveled to make all drug use--pot, acid, coke,
crack, heroin, Ecstasy, speed, downers--appear equally risky and unhealthy.

Did anyone bother to test-market the campaign's figurehead? Any randomly
chosen ninth-grader in America could have cheerfully explained that the
mere visage of Nancy Reagan--let alone the notion of her preaching about
the evils of drug use--would be enough to drive any sane person to find a
way to get good and numb.

Where is the leader willing to kick start some real candor about drug use
in America? One willing to admit, for example, that smoking a joint has
become a near rite of passage in America; that most people will survive it
just fine; that some people will like it more than others; that while it
cuts the edge for most, it induces just enough paranoia to make it
unpleasant for others; that for the vast majority of occasional tokers it
won't lead to harder drugs; that most people grow out of it over time, but
some very small percentage will turn into full-time dopers and become dumb
as doorknobs; that there are various grades of marijuana--Colombian and
Hawaiian being among the most potent--so if you're going to do it, best to
get a handle on what it is you're smoking first.

If we can find a leader who will admit that much, maybe then we can find
another who will acknowledge the injustice in how we administer punishment
for marijuana use; who will concede that by practicing just a little
discretion, one can smoke a joint in broad daylight in any big city in
America--say, on Sansom Street, for example--and not worry about
retribution. Conversely, in, say, Athens, Ga., or maybe even Rosemont, Pa.,
that same impropriety could screw up your life royally; that cops tend to
bust marijuana use depending on workload and the prevailing local ethos;
that if you're going to use, it would serve you well to know the rules to
play by.

And if we could manage to get that far, we could begin to address some
really serious business: Like why users of crack are punished more harshly
than users of cocaine.

Got a guess?

By now you're likely thinking, What's this guy been smoking? Does he really
believe there are politicians out there willing to speak truth about drugs?

Actually, no.

So best to end this missive with an issue that does stand a chance of being
dealt with by political leaders.

Medicinal marijuana.

Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, the former sky-hooking basketball star and author of
several well-regarded books, was recently arrested for marijuana use in
California. It was his second bust.

Abdul-Jabbar suffers from migrane headaches. He's had them his whole life.

His affliction has been well-documented. He smokes pot to relieve the
headaches.

He shouldn't have to hide it. He shouldn't be busted for it. Abdul-Jabbar
is a principled man who should be permitted his dignity.

For decades, cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment have
reported finding relief from nausea with the aid of marijuana. But only in
a handful of states is it legal for doctors to dispense marijuana for
cancer patients.

When pressed, politicians will say this is because they're waiting for more
studies to be completed. What they're not saying is that they're afraid of
being perceived as soft on drugs.

This should be a no-brainer. Yo Al, can we count on you to give us a jump
start here?