Congress poised to regulate tobacco (next week)

TimesDispatch.com ^ | Feb 9, 2007 | PETER HARDIN

[SheLion]

WASHINGTON -- Bipartisan legislation to give the federal Food and Drug Administration regulatory control over tobacco products may be introduced next week.

[EVO X]

BLACK BIRCH BIGGEST ANTI-SMOKER IN FREE REPUBLIC. NO WONDER OUR PARTY IS IN TROUBLE!!!

Democrats out number Republicans by something like 43% to 39%. Republicans get into office with the assistance of the wishy washy independent voter unless they are in a Republican stronghold. Republicans can't really afford to have their fellow voters dropping dead early from smoking related diseases.

That is a bigger problem than me making a few negative comments about smoking..

[Madame Dufarge]

The argument for premature death assumes that each of us is alloted a certain number of years and, if we don't make it, something intervened to put us down.

Yes, the notion that a birth certificate carries an expiration date and the only goal in life is meeting or exceeding that date is confounding to me.

It's as if life were some sort of term paper to be completed according to schedule - and then what?

The goal of dying in perfect health has been met?

[cincinnati65]

"Anti-smoking activists say a steep tax increase would raise billions of dollars and make it harder for teen-agers to afford cigarettes. Teens should be prohibited from buying cigarettes."

My all-time favorite nonsense argument. I had more disposible income as a teenager than I've had at any time in my life. Teenagers will be the LAST people that CAN afford cigarettes.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

The FDA should be stripped of all its regulatory authority except maybe warning labels. Like, it's your own trip, man, but be advised there is a warning on this or that.

[Tarpon]

Well, at least now your library card is safe, or is it? I forgot how this came out while they were telling the fools what Bush was doing to destroy the Constitution.

If by now there is one smoker who doesn't know that there is harm in smoking, he will die soon.

[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Republicans can't really afford to have their fellow voters dropping dead early from smoking related diseases.

Before they become Social Security Democratics.

[ellery]

According to statistics I am likely to be safer driving in a car with second hand smoke than walking to work.

I'm eager to see these statistics; please, do cite them!

So, if you support smoking bans based on the harm of second-hand smoke, why don't you support bans on unnecessary driving based on the well-documented harm drivers cause others?

[Old Professer]

The state would settle for, "in working order..."

[Madame Dufarge]

PS -The big type is because your eyes are shot at your age

Thank you....;-)

All true, too.

[Madame Dufarge]

I don't know what form of pneumonia they died of. but I suspect smoking contributed to their early departure..

Do you always diagnose in the absence of facts and using "suspicion" as a guiding force, Dr. Birch?

How nice that you quit smoking.

Why do you feel compelled to pester and patronize anyone who still does?

Let it go, live your own life and respect others enough to acknowledge they have the same right as you to do the same.

[Madame Dufarge]

You just don't get it do you?

No, you don't get it.

I'm sure you don't realize how childish you sound.

Why can't you whiners just declare victory and shut up?

Your incessant, over-the-top caterwauling has arranged the big, scary world to a such a degree that every smoker in the world now has to stand on the head of a pin to have a cigarette, you've destroyed private property rights and the lives of countless hard-working business owners, crushed civility, and yet you still feel compelled to inflict your incessant complaining on the world in general.

It's approaching psychosis, and still you persist.

[Ditter]

It's not me whining and caterwauling, it's your side. Why do you think I come here. Its called schadenfrauden baby.

[EVO X]

So, if you support smoking bans based on the harm of second-hand smoke

Nowhere on any of these threads have I supported bans. I think I said about 5 times on this thread that I don't support bans. I guess you didn't read the entire thread.

Try googling smoking death statistics.

[EVO X]

It's approaching psychosis, and still you persist.

I'd have to put that comment in the category of the pot calling the kettle black.

[Madame Dufarge]

A failed attempt at deflection is no cause for schadenfreude, baby.

See what I mean by "childish?"

Why do you think I come here.

I would guess some sort of spiritual emptiness or puerile attempt at risk-free revenge for a perceived offense against your self-absorption.

Pure speculation on my part, of course, but one can only work with the information available.

[EVO X]

Before they become Social Security Democratics

LOL, I may have to rethink this line of reasoning..

[Ditter]

Failed? FAILED? Things get better and better for the non smokers and worse and worse for the smokers. Who is failing here?


Thanks for the psychoanalysis Dr. Dufarge but it's way off base.

[Madame Dufarge]

I'd have to put that comment in the category of the pot calling the kettle black.

How so?

Hasn't the reformed-whore contingent gained their great victory?

Smokers just want to be left alone now. Yet you born-agains, having lost all awareness of the messiness that drives a free society, can't resist waving the banner of your neuroses as if it were a flag of victory.

I'm almost embarrassed for you.

[Dawgreg]

I'm with you on that She-Lion. I don't need any jackass politicians telling me what's good and not good for me but welcomes every damn tax dollar I pay for smokes! Waxman looks like he's been sniffin' too much nose candy or his mother carried him by the nose when he was just a mere child! :)

[Madame Dufarge]

Things get better and better for the non smokers and worse and worse for the smokers. Who is failing here?

You're failing.

"Neener, neener" is a wonderful guiding principle for a free society.