The media has made no secret of the story of U.S. Olympic athlete Michael Phelps being caught on camera in November at a party, just toking away at some of that sweet Barney.
Although the "narrow iguana" is not a banned substance during competition that would allow for his medals to ever be taken away. It would seem that Mr. Phelps does not own himself, or that would be the impression that the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) would love for everyone to believe.
The simple truth is that Michael Phelps owns himself. Sure he has contracts with his sponsors and they in general would frown upon his recreational use of ganja. What people should be concerned about is that the "incriminating" photo of him will lose him some of those sponsors, his bread and butter. This is how our good man has kept a full tank of unleaded in the Yugo and kitten chow in sweet little Fluffy's feed bowl.
Those looking to "bring him down" have missed that fact and would be bankrupted for life if they had to make up the difference out of their pockets. He had only one contract with the USOC as opposed to many with his sponsors and it is no violation to smoke whatever substance he likes when he is not in competition. Again they do not own him. As for Phelps being a "role model" of some sort, this is nothing more than a sloppily implied obligation of those who feel they own him, and therefore bogus on it's face. He is his own man, like it or lump it.
Before I forget, understand this all of you "anti-drug warriors" out there: The greatest swimmer in the history of the world puffed away at the superb herb. You and everyone else on the planet that supports criminal penalties for its use would be very hard pressed as to just how you could ever prove that it "impaired" in any way, his performance as an athlete. Please feel free to put that in your bong and smoke it.
With Liberty,
Dan Steward
©2009 Dan Steward, all rights reserved. You must have written permission from the author in order to republish this work.
Published: Thursday, February 5, 2009
Last modified: Thursday, February 5, 2009
The views expressed in this article are those of Dan Steward only and do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. Dan Steward is solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Report violation by Dan Steward of Nolan Chart LLC's terms of use policy.
| More Articles By Dan Steward |
Reader Comments:
Posted By: trd
Date: 2009-02-05 12:36:25
Dan:
Although I have never used those recreational drugs I am totally in favor of its legalization. I can only dictate what I can't do not what others can't. It's their choice and should be respected.
However, if I am a corporation paying him millions of dollars in sponsorships and I have a clause in the agreement against the use of the "iguana", then is up to me to enforce that agreement or break it. As long as I am paying him all that money per the agreement, if he breaches the contract it is my duty to collect, sue, terminate the contract or take the necessary actions.
Therefore, depending on the private agreement that he has with his sponsors, he could be as close to being owned as possible but still have the freedom to breach the agreement and walk away as long as he takes the concequences of his agreements or renegotiates a settlement.
Drinking alcohol or even smoking nicotine is completely legal, but if your private employer tells you not to drink or smoke while on the job, it is your duty to comply or your job or employer can terminate your contract.
So it is the same thing whether is a multimillion contract of just a job.
---
Now with regards to an athlete smoking the pot. In order to achieve his medals this guy had to train for 365 days per year, for 5 to 8 hours per day, burning 15,000 calories per day so whenever he is resting, he is eating. That kind of discipline is very difficult to achieve. Therefore, I am pretty sure that a little puff will do no harm to this guy. Actually he deserves the pot! The sponsor should even buy it for him. While overeating, not-excersising and stressing-out will do plenty more damage than his puff.
Posted By: Master C
Date: 2009-02-06 09:25:25
Hey, Dan,
As someone who has obviously emptied his own share of some bongs, as least judging from the smoky cloud that always surrounds your articles and comments, I'm sure you're one of those who can't see the forest for the haze.
To say that Michael Phelps, or any athlete, can do what they want when they're not competing is to ignore the lingering, if not dominating, effects of these drugs. Shooting up on STEROIDS or HGH (human growth hormone) when you're in the GYM doesn't mitigate the effect these have on your performance. That's why they call them "performance enhancing drugs". Blood doping, and many other methods of gaining an "artificial" advantage in performance, are all done AWAY from the actual field of competition. That doesn't exclude their effect upon the actual athletic event.
And your casual endorsement of "weed" seems to ignore the very obvious effects it has on ANYONE who smokes it regularly. While I think the HYSTERIA over pot has been greatly OVERBLOWN (to use an appropriate pun), that doesn't make it any less of an impediment than those who are hysterical over the FEDERAL RESERVE or SOCIALISM or the US BAILOUT. That's a LOT of hysteria, too, and a more deliberative analysis would be a vast improvement for them as well.
However, let me make a few points that you seem to overlook in your view of the "narrow iguana":
1) inhaling ANY smoky, hot, full-of-tar substance into one's lungs on a regular basis is going to impair breathing. Take a look at ANYONE who smokes regularly ~ any substance, legal or illegal ~ when they reach their later years, and you'll see the decline in their health. If you think that "wheeze" when you run is natural, you're greatly mistaken.
2) obtaining any illegal substance on a regular basis supports and contributes to those in the underground of crime; it makes the black market stronger and supports criminal activities of other types ~ prostitution, guns, burlaries, insurance operations, bribes to public officials, etc.
3) any drug gives a false, distorted image of reality whether taken to relax, excite, stimulate, inspire, or energize someone. The competition is based upon ATHLETIC ABILITY not DRUG TAKING ability.
4) there is always PSYCHOLOGICAL DEPENDENCE created, not just physical, for the regular use of ANY drug. And, because of the continued denial that there is a dependence, the psychological dependence is often stronger and more persisitent than the physical.
5) the use of ANY illegal substances by prominent sports figures ALWAYS trickles down to those who emulate them. Younger kids, those looking for a boost to their performance, always copy the habits and endorsements of those who are successful.
Your total obliviousness of these effects is probably obscurred by that overused BONG you have, Mr. Steward. It's always the USER who thinks that it's ok to use whatever it is. It clouds judgment in ways that, I'm sure, are too murky for you to perceive.
Master C
Posted By: Dan Steward
Date: 2009-02-06 11:26:04
Posted By: Master C
Hey, Dan,As someone who has obviously emptied his own share of some bongs, as least judging from the smoky cloud that always surrounds your articles and comments, I'm sure you're one of those who can't see the forest for the haze.
So sez the leftist academian...
I knew you'd throw your moth-eaten hat in the ring, Carl, it's just too tempting for an attention hog such as yourself for you to resist.
Acusing me of being a user of illicit drugs is a new low on your part even for you. Not that my private life is any of your business, but I don't do things that would put me in danger of going to jail, it's just not smart as a high profile dissident. Using any drug stronger than caffeine, energy drinks, or nicotine is out of the question for me.
What you carelessly belched forth about me in your ignorance laced blatherings is nothing more than slander of my character and good name. You'd be wise to not repeat such a vile stunt no matter what your ungrounded and seemingly ever changing political agenda may be.
I've written over 50 articles to this site and this is the first one where I even mentioned da kine of any kind. That's less than 2% there Mr. Economics Professor.
Don't come crying to me when you don't get taken seriously, its all your doing that causes it.
With that out of the way, the drug war is a cruel hoax put forth by those seeking to separate people from their money, property and freedoms.
To say that Michael Phelps, or any athlete, can do what they want when they're not competing is to ignore the lingering, if not dominating, effects of these drugs. Shooting up on STEROIDS or HGH (human growth hormone) when you're in the GYM doesn't mitigate the effect these have on your performance.
Phelps never tested positive for steroids or HGH. He admitted to torching up some of that supergrass. His like (or maybe love) of maryjane had him shooting up absolutely nothing. Are you serious?
You want to be taken seriously as someone who can add even an inkling of content to a debate, yet you can't resist the absurd urge to link off season puff or twenty with intravenous drug use.
The rest of your rantings do not even merit a response. You love the state because you have benefitted from it in the means of a governmnt check for spouting the party line to students for decades and continue to do so, I'm sure with your retirement checks you likely get from them.
Of course you won't ever speak out against their wicked drug laws that harm even the innocent. You've been paid off to keep quiet like a good little serf.
With Liberty,
Dan Steward
Posted By: Steve
Date: 2009-02-06 15:49:04
Master C,
How was that last bottle of fine wine?
Posted By: Master C
Date: 2009-02-07 08:56:45
Hey, Danny,
Boy, you really got your panties in a bind again didn't you? For you to feign the outraged, slandered, innocent victim of my remarks is as humorous as Michael Vick claiming it was an invasion of his privacy for the authorities to stop his dogfights!
For anyone who obviously knows all the lingo and jargon of the marijuania trade, you have obviously been around it a lot. My bet is that you've used it MANY times, and have sampled many varieties. Are you AFRAID to admit it? To pull that "what me?" stuff is a little disingenuous, wouldn't you say? Even I've smoked it many times. I even used to grow a couple of weeds for my own use back in the day. So what? LOTS of people have, and do, use it.
However, the point of my comments was that it has often disregarded effects, especially on those who emulate athletes. For Phelps to smoke weed is much different from him not being discreet about it ~ for HIS protection as much as those whom he might influence.
Your objection to his situation seems to be that he should be able to do anything he wants to with no criticism, no prosecution, or no concerns. My point was that you're overlooking some obvious cautions that ANYONE using weed should be aware of.
If you, or anyone else, want to smoke weed, cigarettes, cigars, meth, crack ~ whatever ~ that's no sweat off my huge gonads. But, if you think there are no deleterious effects ~ for you and others around you, or someone like Michael Phelps ~ you're way off base.
And, believe me, your comments about GOVERNMENT INSURRECTION are much more apt to get you into a LOT more trouble than anything I might have implied about your smoking weed. Your views on GUNS, the FED, OBAMA, the abuse of the CONSTITUTION and many other of your narrowly-held views make YOU someone who's an obvious anti-law, anti-government hot-head.
Maybe you ought to CHILL a little, Danny boy, and start smelling the roses instead of wandering through them aimlessly.
Master C
Posted By: Jake, the champion of the constitution
Date: 2009-02-08 19:44:26
Good stuff Dan! trd's comment pretty much sums up what I think as well. - Jake
Posted By: Steve M
Date: 2009-02-09 12:47:17
My point being that if we hold athletes up to some level of behavior because they might influence others shouldn't we do the same for academics?
Shouldn't we be worried about the clarity of mind of a lecturer if they had imbibed a drink the night before? Should we worry about their judgment if they grade papers or exams after dinner and a drink?
Or maybe we should judge both academics and athletes by their performance? Academics of course who plagiarize should get the boot and athletes (for sports promoting a level playing field based upon hard work and natural abilities) that make use of performance enhancing chemicals. Academics who produce outstanding work and quality students and athletes that win Gold Medals should be rewarded.
As for me, well I haven't made donations to the USA Swimming Foundation so I can't cut them off but I do get the choice of what products I buy and from whom. So Kellogg's is added to the do not buy from list while Subway which didn't pull its support from Phelps will be much more likely to see me at lunch.
Posted By: Jason
Date: 2009-02-09 22:27:02
Well Master C, you make some valid points but compare the Legal Alcohol and Illegal Ganja. Would you rather have someone drive on Ganja or Alcohol? Have you ever had Ganja poisoning? If you grow your own Ganja how is that contributing to the black market, prostitution and crime? Have you ever witnessed a bunch of people that are stoned starting bar fights, beating there wife, yelling and screaming at 2 in the morning wanting to go streaking across the quad, waking the neighbors, cussing the cops and resisting arrest. In your opinion what do you think is worse? You want to help our economy Legalize the Green!!! Guarantee people will come out of the wood works to buy a pack of the Skunk. Oh and drugs clouding reality may be true but we should be worrying about how the government has already clouded the reality of most people in the USA. I think the feds need a reality check!!