"Michael's most recent behavior is not consistent with the image of Kellogg."
Seriously? Let's consider Kellogg's image.
I understand that the folks at Kellogg work to earn a living and they are feeding the masses. But spare us the high and mighty judgement when your bottom line is more about quarterly earnings than the nutritional well being of the world. They peddle over-priced, sugar laden crap to children on Saturday morning TV and extol the virtues of eating practically nothing but Special K to self-conscious dieters seeking remarkable transformations. Their statements about Phelps' behavior portray the image of the "duck-and-cover" era, one where the public is too ignorant to question authority and perhaps too many hours are spent watching "Assassin of Youth."
Michael Phelps is proof that the debate over pot is far from over. Stereotypically, pot smokers are considered lazy, munchie-craving ne'er-do-wells with no ambition. Many have commented that Phelps drive for success is undeniable. For them, and me, eight Olympic gold medals are proof enough. Besides, it's clear that he does much more than hit a bong in his downtime. I'm certain that many pot smokers' proclivity to laziness or lack of ambition was a trait for them long before they began hitting the pipe.
The big marijuana debate may go on, but the times continue to change. I believe a sensible dialog based on science, rather than fear or social mores, would reveal far more pros than cons to eliminating the stigma associated with pot use. The black market and the crime associated with it would disappear. People serving time for marijuana crimes could be released, making room in American jails and prisons for real criminals.
The arguments will continue. I need to move along but not before I tell Kellogg's to "suck it." Cenk Uygur at Huffington Post sums it up nicely for me, suggesting that Kellogg's response may backfire on them. One can only hope. I'd love a public apology...