thas right boyssss cheap ciggarrretteessssss

[LINUS]

Corvalis -

I don't disagree we dropped the ball since we had some info on what was going on, but Clinton had shots at Osama & didn't take 'em. Bill watched as Osama helped the locals in Afganistan build & improve alot of lives. He was a good guy to have around for them, no wonder they love the guy.

It's not Dems as a party that scare me, it's Hillary. She has really good control of the Dem political machine - but she's still a Dem & despite not being the average party member & advocating some reason, how long will that hold out?
Rudy may not get the ticket because of his "meh" rating with conservative Christians. I don't see a clear frontrunner in the Reps - I just hope he's got balls to go into Iran if we need to, and I don't see that as something Hillary will do.
She might continue her record of supporting domestic defense, but at some point you have to play to your party. Political suicide not to.

IDK, I just wouldn't lay it all on Bush - time will tell what he knew & never said, and what he let fall as blame on himself. He's said all along he's not got popularity as a driver in his career. I wouldn't want his job, that's for sure.

[atomic]

Why anyone thinks that Dems are 'soft' on security is beyond me; simply because they aren't paranoid doesn't mean they are soft. And btw, when did the 2 attacks on the WTC happen? Oh yeah, right, it was under Republican administrations. Not like it matters though, do you think the terrorists care which party is in the oval office at the time?

Yeah, invade Iran, great idea. I'm SURE we'll be greeted as liberators this time around.......

Where were you in 1993, 1994 when the first attempt on attacking the world trade center happened? It was a failed attempt because the explosives used did not bring down the tower. The president at the time was " Bill Clinton " and while he was in office the attacks on our embassies over seas killing many and the attack on the battle ship the " USS COLE". So yes it is proven the dems are soft on security as they always treated these cases as a police matter and not as a enemy attacking us.

And the horrific attacks on 9/11 were in fact under a republican president but that had just taken office 9 months earlier. And in fact the attack was planned years in advance. Maybe Bush would have been able to do more at stopping it if Clinton would have had good intelligence regarding the attacks but since Clinton cut back the intelligence community and military back to nothing I guess thats to much to ask.

[Julien]

Bush had been on vacation for 9 months earlier. And in fact the attack was planned years in advance. Maybe Bush would have been able to do more at stopping it if Clinton would have had good intelligence regarding the attacks but since Clinton cut back the intelligence community and military back to nothing I guess thats to much to ask.

Just a fix.


Terrorist attacks have got shit to do with our presence in iraq. sorry.

[atomic]

get rid of the iraq situation and then bring up the big government/too much tax money spent issue again.

Where would you be in France in todays world if it wasnt for us ? And for the record Napa valley has plenty of fine wines to keep from purchasing them from France. So good luck to you with your sentiment towards the USA

[atomic]

Just a fix.


Terrorist attacks have got shit to do with our presence in iraq. sorry.

I never said they do either so dont make me out for one who said that, even though I am a republican. And by changing my words in the quote make you out to be a bigger idiot. Why dont you frenchie worry about your own low income problems your country has over there. :weak:

I am done with this topic as being banned for flaming is not in my best interest as I have a BMW e30 to build.

[Julien]

Where would you be in France in todays world if it wasnt for us ? And for the record Napa valley has plenty of fine wines to keep from purchasing them from France. So good luck to you with your sentiment towards the USA

but quality of life is 1000x in france. pm when your grandmom comes to aix to see cezanne's paintings :-*

[atomic]

but quality of life is 1000x in france. pm when your grandmom comes to aix to see cezanne's paintings :-*

Dont count on that happening since they are both dead

[browntown]

Study after study has shown that as cigarette prices increase, more people are likely to quit smoking.

I'm not a big believer that this is true, but lets assume you're correct. What other sin taxes would you like to impose to protect us from our selves?

sign a waiver to buy bacon?
10$ big macs?
100$ bottle of jack daniels?
10000$ handguns? or the joke, make a bullet 10,000 so it's worth it

Keep in mind that smoking is a significant risk factor, just like high blood sugar, cholesterol, triglycerides, family history, abdominal obesity, pancreatic beta cell function, sodium / potassium inbalance, liver function, the list goes on. I work in the healthcare industry and know all the ways people put themselves at risk of death down the road. Especially cardiac outcomes. Choosing one group over another is unfair and illogical.

This country has proved that the moral crusade to save people from themselves does not work -- abolition failed and will never be tried again.

I believe America is a place where you make your own choices, and if you want to abuse your body it is your right to do so. Sin taxes are a backdoor way of the government imposing what they think is in our interests and in the end will further limit our liberties more than allow them.

All that being said I'm in the process of quitting (Chantix with a Bupropion 300mg chaser) and it will likely be the hardest thing I've done in my life. I'm not quitting because of price. I LOVE smoking and would pay much higher prices if I had to. I'm doing it because of a personal health decision that took 5 years to man up and make. It is more difficult than most people understand and should not be forced on anyone.

Everybody agrees they are one of the most addictive things on the planet, physically and mentally. Ask anyone that smoked full time for 10years (15 in my case) and tried to quit. Now imagine a single mom that makes minimum wage. Now take an extra 20 bucks a week out of her purse, and tell her it's for her own good. She doesn't have access to the very expensive pharmaceutical solutions. She might try to quit cold turkey but everyone knows it's rare for that to work. What have you done? Made her feel guilty, and taken away money she and her family needs. Who are you helping? You should feel guilty.

[Turf1600]

I believe America is a place where you make your own choices, and if you want to abuse your body it is your right to do so. Sin taxes are a backdoor way of the government imposing what they think is in our interests and in the end will further limit our liberties more than allow them.

.

The reason why they are banning it/raising taxes is the impact on other people - not themselves. Not to mention insurance lobbyists. they just banned indoor smoking in all of houston - I couldn't be happier.

[Turf1600]

Oh and as for feeling guilty - I'll feel guilty when she calls me to set up her $5,000 PET CT with a diagnosis of restaging NSCLC.

[TwoJ's]

You guys need to find an "indian" reservation to buy tobacco on. I buy my skoal there and it's $3 less per can.

[Jscotty]

What you guys are failing to realize is that this is not a republican/democrat thing- its a MONEY and POWER thing where everyone in congress is working together to make themselves wealthy and their friends rich. The opposition that you see is nothing more than a smoke screen to keep us confused and distracted from the things that are really going on behind closed doors. When taxes go up, EVERYONE in congress benefits from it. Each party just sends out a representative to argue for and/or against the issue so it does not look like a conspiracy.

Congress would be heavily scrutinized if they all voted unanimously every time it meant raising taxes or spending money.

[ak96ss]

Well, IMO, this is not the issue we should be discussing. Funding this with taxes on cigarettes is the smoke screen, making it appear as if the Dems are being fiscally 'responsible' by using a sin tax to pay for it.

The real issue is the SCHIP bill would expand the program to provide coverage to families who earn 300% of the federally-defined poverty level, or up to $83,000/year for a family of four, depending on the state.

We are rapidly approaching the point where we may as well just socialize medicine, shitcan insurance coverage entirely, and provide everyone free medical care.

What are the odds of that happening and, honestly, do we really want that? I don't.

[Turf1600]

Well, IMO, this is not the issue we should be discussing. Funding this with taxes on cigarettes is the smoke screen, making it appear as if the Dems are being fiscally 'responsible' by using a sin tax to pay for it.

The real issue is the SCHIP bill would expand the program to provide coverage to families who earn 300% of the federally-defined poverty level, or up to $83,000/year for a family of four, depending on the state.

We are rapidly approaching the point where we may as well just socialize medicine, shitcan insurance coverage entirely, and provide everyone free medical care.

What are the odds of that happening and, honestly, do we really want that? I don't.

It's not going to happen. And I don't want it.

[Jscotty]

Another thing that you have to understand about politics is that everyone wants something. And the only people in congress who are going to vote for SCHIP are the ones who can reap the benefits from it. So when you see and hear them arguing about it on CSPAN, what they are really saying is, "I will vote for this if my special intrest groups can get a payday out of it.