FDA Tobacco Ban - Page 2 - Politics and War Forum

Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.
Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Thursday, September 24, 2009 3:04 PM on j-body.org
so when is this actully starting?



~Jeff

Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Thursday, September 24, 2009 3:15 PM on j-body.org
They banning swishers too?



Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Thursday, September 24, 2009 3:56 PM on j-body.org
^ there's talk of them banning the flavored, filtered little cigars. i cant see them banning the actual cigars however.

the ban went into effect 2 days ago, retailers have until October 30 to sell off their product, and then the companies have to liquidate whatever's leftover.




Check out my build thread!

Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Thursday, September 24, 2009 5:27 PM on j-body.org
This is for sure going to be challenged in court. It'll lose in appellate though.


“Poor Al Gore. Global warming completely debunked via the very Internet you invented. Oh, oh, the irony!” -Jon Stewart
Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Thursday, September 24, 2009 5:53 PM on j-body.org
Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:

LOL, well you aren't Black, Asian, or Oceanic, and Hispanic is more of an ethnicity than a Race (at least in scientific terms)...
My Hispanic friends throw fits when I tell them they are white


Lol you're right though, on all job applications in NY where im from and test in school when you bubble in your race it either says White/Hispanic or does not mention Hispanic at all, but it does mention Mexican and stuff like that lol.

RuggedZ wrote:

^ supposedly they're marketed toward children. its just another bull@!#$ way to @!#$ over the american public, and one step closer to becoming a nation where its illegal to smoke.


It doesnt make sense to me especially with cloves, no youngsters I know smoke cloves or even like the smell/taste of it, most kids I know who smoke em (16+ yrs old ) are scene kids or goths. All the real young kids I know especially when I worked in a high school love menthol!



Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Friday, September 25, 2009 7:36 PM on j-body.org
Let's consider this for one second:

Flavored tobacco products are banned because the evil tobacco companies are supposedly marketing them to attract children. This is bad.

However, flavored condoms are OK, and more importantly, condoms in general should be given out to children for free, because teaching them to abstain at young ages would be ludicrous. And then when kids do get pregnant, because they obviously missed the condom hand-outs, they should be allowed to walk into a clinic and get an abortion without their parents being told, even though a minor can't get a tattoo or piercing without a parent or legal guardian.

When is our country as a whole going to start waking up to the utter stupidity of the big picture?







Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 10:54 AM on j-body.org
Good job now the CIA is definitely going to come to your house, they know that you know their plans!!!!

lol, nah seriously though I agree with you 100%



Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 11:21 AM on j-body.org
Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:

Let's consider this for one second:

Flavored tobacco products are banned because the evil tobacco companies are supposedly marketing them to attract children. This is bad.

However, flavored condoms are OK, and more importantly, condoms in general should be given out to children for free, because teaching them to abstain at young ages would be ludicrous. And then when kids do get pregnant, because they obviously missed the condom hand-outs, they should be allowed to walk into a clinic and get an abortion without their parents being told, even though a minor can't get a tattoo or piercing without a parent or legal guardian.

When is our country as a whole going to start waking up to the utter stupidity of the big picture?


truer words have never been spoken.




Check out my build thread!

Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 12:52 PM on j-body.org
Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:

Let's consider this for one second:

Flavored tobacco products are banned because the evil tobacco companies are supposedly marketing them to attract children. This is bad.

However, flavored condoms are OK, and more importantly, condoms in general should be given out to children for free, because teaching them to abstain at young ages would be ludicrous. And then when kids do get pregnant, because they obviously missed the condom hand-outs, they should be allowed to walk into a clinic and get an abortion without their parents being told, even though a minor can't get a tattoo or piercing without a parent or legal guardian.

When is our country as a whole going to start waking up to the utter stupidity of the big picture?


The the bold is indeed a fact. The rest are just extreme views trying to stick to the wall.
You can teach abstain or scare kids that sex before marriage will lead you to sit next the devil when you die. But in the end, you are teaching/telling them to go against on issues that are innate in human nature or the mammal species for the matter.
Having flavor condoms is indeed ok, simply because many teaching (religious especially) say that sex is considered if going to vaginal penetration. Now failing to teach on the implications of oral sex to kids instead (again because of innate mammal sexual nature) now it can result in the practice of such. You might say so what as no procreation occurs? But but now you run the risk of STD... this is where flavored condoms comes in to prevent it. Yea, nobody would like to see their little daughter with that image, but I'm willing to bet nobody will like to see their little girl with blisters all over their mouth or worse, known to have contracted HIV. Now on the abortion with parent's consent, that is just personal opinion, personally I would rather her have it done at free will so it will not ruin her for the rest of her life, just because nobody is perfect and everyone makes mistakes (more-so when young) and hope she learned her lesson. All a parent can really do is teach and just hope they've listened to prevent an abortion.

---

Now on the issue of banning.
I think it is a bad/good idea. Bad because of the business case on loosing more revenue for the company and government-- those with high tobacco tax rate. And well, people might smoke less so there might be people living longer (overpopulation) lol. The good, people will live longer and may drive health care costs lower. But I say if you want to have a slow death go for it, who is anyone to stop you. And that especially goes with Jeb Bush's & Tery Shiavo's case where government was trying to keep her alive.


THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.

Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 1:18 PM on j-body.org
^ the point is the government thinks they know whats best for the people, and the people are too stupid to make their own decisions.

if people want to smoke, let them. as long as they're of age, its their decision. there are many more pressing issues at hand than flavored tobacco.





Check out my build thread!

Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 1:52 PM on j-body.org
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:



Flavored tobacco products are banned because the evil tobacco companies are supposedly marketing them to attract children. This is bad.


The the bold is indeed a fact.


How? How is it that the past few years of my life I have never seen ONE commercial for cigarettes? They don't advertise them during sunday cartoons anymore. I don't see Joe Camel popping up in any nickelodeon magazines, exactly how are they getting out to these small children?

Oh wait, I know...

SOMEONE ELSE IS INFLUENCING THEM! Oh, what a novel idea! Mom smokes, dad smokes, I wonder what would happen if I steal one and go smoke it outside the shed?

Quote:


The rest are just extreme views trying to stick to the wall.
You can teach abstain or scare kids that sex before marriage will lead you to sit next the devil when you die. But in the end, you are teaching/telling them to go against on issues that are innate in human nature or the mammal species for the matter.
Having flavor condoms is indeed ok, simply because many teaching (religious especially) say that sex is considered if going to vaginal penetration. Now failing to teach on the implications of oral sex to kids instead (again because of innate mammal sexual nature) now it can result in the practice of such. You might say so what as no procreation occurs? But but now you run the risk of STD... this is where flavored condoms comes in to prevent it. Yea, nobody would like to see their little daughter with that image, but I'm willing to bet nobody will like to see their little girl with blisters all over their mouth or worse, known to have contracted HIV.


Bolded the parts of that babble that made my head hurt.

Why didn't we have these problems 10-15 years ago? It's not because human nature is making these kids suck each other off, it's because sex and everything that comes with it IS being marketed to children and they're learning about/glorifying these things at a younger and younger age.

"How am I supposed to sell sex to little girls if you don't wear the purity rings!? When little girl's ginies tickle, I MAKE MONEY!!"

Quote:


Now on the issue of banning.
I think it is a bad/good idea. Bad because of the business case on loosing more revenue for the company and government-- those with high tobacco tax rate. And well, people might smoke less so there might be people living longer (overpopulation) lol. The good, people will live longer and may drive health care costs lower. But I say if you want to have a slow death go for it, who is anyone to stop you. And that especially goes with Jeb Bush's & Tery Shiavo's case where government was trying to keep her alive.


I can see your point, and yes it would make for a healthier population if they all-out banned cigs. But the bigger question is where does that power stop? If they ban cigs, certainly they have to ban pop and any other unhealthy foods, because eating at McDonalds every day will kill you faster than a few cigs a day. It all falls on personal responsibility, and it seems like the govt is trying to take that important lesson away from the general population: If you do stupid @!#$, it'll catch up with you in the long run.




Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 3:17 PM on j-body.org
umm if someone is smoking these things and they get banned i seriously doubt people will stop. they will just smoke one of the alternatives, this wont stop anything. and the freaking cigarette people dont have @!#$ to do with making kids smoke, kids see adults do it so they think its cool. so they start smoking its as simple as that. mom and dads been smoking for some kids 15 entire years and somehow its the cigarette or cigar companies fault that little johnny lit up. give me a break.





i just want to know how quick knows condoms are flavored?????? what have you been eating my man?


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 3:30 PM on j-body.org
Quote:

How? How is it that the past few years of my life I have never seen ONE commercial for cigarettes? They don't advertise them during sunday cartoons anymore. I don't see Joe Camel popping up in any nickelodeon magazines, exactly how are they getting out to these small children?

Oh wait, I know...

SOMEONE ELSE IS INFLUENCING THEM! Oh, what a novel idea! Mom smokes, dad smokes, I wonder what would happen if I steal one and go smoke it outside the shed?

Well, if you know, (almost) all types cigarette ads are just about banned in the US, you don't need ads in "Teen Magazine" or show TV ads during after-school to know where cig companies are trying to market to. I'm in this field, and we know exactly what to do to bring specific consumers to X product no matter what age, sex, race, religion or whatever group that market needs to be tapped. Putting sweet flavor cigarettes will not only add variety for older adult generations, but it will welcome to younger ones as well. You might say, "well, I like sweet, so they're not just enticing kids." But next time you go your local supermarket, look at the cereal section and stop and think where is X brand marketing too? Once you see this, then you'll see where the sweet flavored cigs are mostly gearing too. As older generations become educated on the harm of cigs, sales will indeed drop, so the only option is now to get naive & ignorant youth. That's an aspect of capitalism, you have to make money no matter what cost; so the new target is now the youth in hopes that they stay a customer for life with it's addiction.

Quote:

Why didn't we have these problems 10-15 years ago? It's not because human nature is making these kids suck each other off, it's because sex and everything that comes with it IS being marketed to children and they're learning about/glorifying these things at a younger and younger age.

"How am I supposed to sell sex to little girls if you don't wear the purity rings!? When little girl's ginies tickle, I MAKE MONEY!!"

Sorry to inform you but the problem has been here more that "10-15 years ago." Yes, sex sells too. And the reason (you) hear it more now with kids having sex is because it is being exposed and brought to light and with it, the story being told now that "it is wrong." I agree totally on the wrong part, but none of this $hit is new. Kids (as in teens) always have been having sex, many cultures marry at age 14-15 years old. 100 years ago it was common for a 13 year old to get married in Italy or any part of Europe, Middle East, South America, Asia, in this country alone, in the early twentieth century women were conceiving children in their mid- to late teenage stage and still was considered a correct lifestyle. Hell, even today Sarah Palin's daughter had a child at 17 and in her mother's eyes it was ok, even though for political movement it was frowned upon.

Quote:

I can see your point, and yes it would make for a healthier population if they all-out banned cigs. But the bigger question is where does that power stop? If they ban cigs, certainly they have to ban pop and any other unhealthy foods, because eating at McDonalds every day will kill you faster than a few cigs a day. It all falls on personal responsibility, and it seems like the govt is trying to take that important lesson away from the general population: If you do stupid @!#$, it'll catch up with you in the long run.


See that highlighted word? That's your reason that you can't ban what you mention. Cigs on the other hand are not "foods." Yes, you may get a clogged artery, get high blood pressure, or may become diabetic if you eat certain things, but in the end it is a consumable product. Another reason this is getting attention in recent past years, is because of the multimillion dollar lawsuits that has been going on for the past 30+ years. This issue bring good ratings, just because of the amount of money it involves. And also it is easy to hate the Cigarette company because they never mention the harm it causes as people took it in like water in years past.




THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.

Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 3:41 PM on j-body.org
on an aside, what are you guys paying per pack of djarums?



JBO Stickers! Get yours today!
Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 3:43 PM on j-body.org
Looks like the mob just picked up another product line! Bet nobody is complaining there. Did they ban Hookah tobacco also? I heard that stuff turns you into a terrorist!


___________________________________________________________________

Hahn Stage II - Mitsu TD06-20g |3" Turbo-back Exhaust | 61mm Bored TB |
HP Tuners | Innovate WB02 | Spec Stage 3 | Team Green LSD | TurboTech Upper | Full Addco Sways | Sportlines & Yellows |
Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 3:52 PM on j-body.org
Rich Grayo Jr. wrote:

on an aside, what are you guys paying per pack of djarums?


they're like $7/pack in my area




Check out my build thread!

Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Monday, September 28, 2009 5:21 PM on j-body.org
BlackEco wrote:

Looks like the mob just picked up another product line! Bet nobody is complaining there. Did they ban Hookah tobacco also? I heard that stuff turns you into a terrorist!


too funny!



Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 9:21 AM on j-body.org
most kids dont even care about a sweet taste. i once smoked some cigarettes while fishing with buddies hoping the smoke would keep the bugs away which it seemed like it did, but afterwards i was like how can you guys smoke this stuff it tastes like @!#$, and they all responded, well you get used to it. and i said if it tastes like @!#$ why would you even bother getting USED to it. why wouldnt u stop. no one answered.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/sndsgood/ https://www.facebook.com/#!/Square1Photography
Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 10:11 AM on j-body.org
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:

Let's consider this for one second:

Flavored tobacco products are banned because the evil tobacco companies are supposedly marketing them to attract children. This is bad.

However, flavored condoms are OK, and more importantly, condoms in general should be given out to children for free, because teaching them to abstain at young ages would be ludicrous. And then when kids do get pregnant, because they obviously missed the condom hand-outs, they should be allowed to walk into a clinic and get an abortion without their parents being told, even though a minor can't get a tattoo or piercing without a parent or legal guardian.

When is our country as a whole going to start waking up to the utter stupidity of the big picture?


The the bold is indeed a fact. The rest are just extreme views trying to stick to the wall.
OK, so you are saying that the left hasn't been pushing for years to give out condoms to teenagers, or put condom dispensers in schools? Are you trying to say that they haven't been constantly arguing the point that teens should be able to have an abortion without parental permission or notification?

I'm really interested to hear which part of this statement you can actually dispel as an "extreme view trying to stick to the wall". This should be interesting.



Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

You can teach abstain or scare kids that sex before marriage will lead you to sit next the devil when you die. But in the end, you are teaching/telling them to go against on issues that are innate in human nature or the mammal species for the matter.
Having flavor condoms is indeed ok, simply because many teaching (religious especially) say that sex is considered if going to vaginal penetration. Now failing to teach on the implications of oral sex to kids instead (again because of innate mammal sexual nature) now it can result in the practice of such. You might say so what as no procreation occurs? But but now you run the risk of STD... this is where flavored condoms comes in to prevent it. Yea, nobody would like to see their little daughter with that image, but I'm willing to bet nobody will like to see their little girl with blisters all over their mouth or worse, known to have contracted HIV. Now on the abortion with parent's consent, that is just personal opinion, personally I would rather her have it done at free will so it will not ruin her for the rest of her life, just because nobody is perfect and everyone makes mistakes (more-so when young) and hope she learned her lesson. All a parent can really do is teach and just hope they've listened to prevent an abortion.
After getting through the catastrophically ill-constructed sentences, one can get the gist of what it seems you are trying to convey is that one; (falling in line with the left wing beliefs that everyone should just forget about deterring the behavior and just make it safer) the condoms are OK because it's just scare tactics if you try to teach teens to not have sex, and two; that it's just a natural instinct, so there's no reason to teach moral values.

As for the free teen abortion without parents consent being a personal opinion, are you arguing that the parents who are raising that teen don't have the right to make that choice of what's right and wrong? When you talk about free choice, you also have to include the rights of the parent or legal guardian to teach the child morals, unless, of course, you believe that it's all up to Big Brother,and parents shouldn't really have a say. Another question I'd like to hear an argument for is this: why should the tax dollars of millions of people be going toward getting someone out of a mistake, when they don't even agree with the morality of the procedure in the first place?

What I will say on this entire subject is that, once again, too many people in our society are just taking the easy way out. It's the "if you can't beat 'em, join 'em" mentality. However, there is also a definite double standard with regards to the two subjects. And once again I will point out that the reason for the massive campaign against tobacco is because there are huge corporations involved. This is where the left gets the fuel for their fire in vilifying anything. They just start throwing around the tag lines such as "evil corporate greed" and "big tobacco", and "taking advantage of children" etc. etc., and they get people to jump on board in droves without considering what it is they are actually doing.



sndsgood wrote:

i just want to know how quick knows condoms are flavored?????? what have you been eating my man?
LOL. You've never noticed all the specialties you can buy when purchasing them? I personally haven't tried any of them, but if you have ever bought condoms, the flavored ones are usually right there and easily spotted.





Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 11:03 AM on j-body.org
On the condom/abortion for teens issue... There are a few people out there that do still have some morals/beliefs that make providing condoms and abortions to teens unneeded.My girlfriend has made it clear that she has absolutely no intention of having sex unless she is married. Now as a gentleman I am willing to respect her wishes and actually respect her more for that. As a guy I am slightly disappointed, but i do have two hands if i need to take care of things. Come to think of it I do believe my sister made my brother in-law wait till they were married as well.


I cant recall the last time I saw an add for tobacco. Most people I know my age started smoking because their parents or peers did, not because an add made it sound like a good idea. Stores cant even sell to kids so what is the point of advertising to them? Personally I would rather smell someone smoking a flavored cigar/pipe/cigg. than a regular one. A cherry flavored cigar smells better than the normal dog turd ones.



Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 12:51 PM on j-body.org
Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:

Let's consider this for one second:

Flavored tobacco products are banned because the evil tobacco companies are supposedly marketing them to attract children. This is bad.

However, flavored condoms are OK, and more importantly, condoms in general should be given out to children for free, because teaching them to abstain at young ages would be ludicrous. And then when kids do get pregnant, because they obviously missed the condom hand-outs, they should be allowed to walk into a clinic and get an abortion without their parents being told, even though a minor can't get a tattoo or piercing without a parent or legal guardian.

When is our country as a whole going to start waking up to the utter stupidity of the big picture?


The the bold is indeed a fact. The rest are just extreme views trying to stick to the wall.
OK, so you are saying that the left hasn't been pushing for years to give out condoms to teenagers, or put condom dispensers in schools? Are you trying to say that they haven't been constantly arguing the point that teens should be able to have an abortion without parental permission or notification?

I'm really interested to hear which part of this statement you can actually dispel as an "extreme view trying to stick to the wall". This should be interesting.

The left, the right, whatever all been pushing for condoms or contraceptives. Schools do not pass them out out like candy on a daily routine, you will have to go to the school's nurse to ask for one.
There's your extreme/ sarcastic view in bold. And I don't know who is your aforementioned "they."

Quote:

After getting through the catastrophically ill-constructed sentences,

You know your argument is going weak when you have to result to this. If you are going to complain to me about this, at least do the favor to check your writings before you criticize. Looks like your hypocrisy will never end huh. On a serious note, it is old and irrelevant.


Quote:

you are trying to convey is that one; (falling in line with the left wing beliefs that everyone should just forget about deterring the behavior and just make it safer) the condoms are OK because it's just scare tactics if you try to teach teens to not have sex, and two; that it's just a natural instinct, so there's no reason to teach moral values.

It is not a left, right, middle, issues it is known human trait. Hormones are more enraged at a young age. Chances are at your teen age years you had to result in masturbation to relieve your homeyness, but others get lucky and use a partner instead, the ones with partners are running the risk. Telling a human of any age to not have sexual relations of any form is like telling someone not to blink. It is wishful thinking to say that teaching abstinence is sole solution to prevent STDs/pregnancy and that teens will execute it. Not saying it does not exist, but the majority will lie or not practice abstinence. Hey numb-nuts, I agree on teaching of abstinence, but I also have to be real that the majority of kids will not listen too, so if they are having sexual relations, to the very least, have it safer.

Quote:

As for the free teen abortion without parents consent being a personal opinion, are you arguing that the parents who are raising that teen don't have the right to make that choice of what's right and wrong? When you talk about free choice, you also have to include the rights of the parent or legal guardian to teach the child morals, unless, of course, you believe that it's all up to Big Brother,and parents shouldn't really have a say. Another question I'd like to hear an argument for is this: why should the tax dollars of millions of people be going toward getting someone out of a mistake, when they don't even agree with the morality of the procedure in the first place?
It is a personal opinion. I don't need to read more extreme views on big brother. And parents they have a say, but that's all it is, words (what it should be IMO). It is not the father or mother having the child, it is her. And much how by the time she is 18 and her parents do not have to legally pay for her anymore, many times the the 18 year old is by herself, in a tough environment only made tougher because she has a child. Now she is living a predicament because of her past mistake.
As for your question on: "that they don't even agree with the morality of the procedure in the first place." I don't know, I don't care, I can not speak for them. All (I) can say is, I rather pay one shot (out of tax money) for a/one abortion, then to pay 18 years of social support through tax money, because that parent can not support her child on her own.

Quote:

What I will say on this entire subject is that, once again, too many people in our society are just taking the easy way out.

That's the American way and history proves that. Hey why did we bring over the blacks over to this nation? I can tell you it wasn't for a cup of tea.

Quote:

This is where the left gets the fuel for their fire in vilifying anything. They just start throwing around the tag lines such as "evil corporate greed" and "big tobacco", and "taking advantage of children" etc. etc., and they get people to jump on board in droves without considering what it is they are actually doing.

And last but not least, more extreme views. If you know how big tobacco did business during the last century, as in they knew what the cigs contains and did not label as such. The only reason "big tobacco" labeled it's harm was because of government demanding it after people started getting sick.
I know you personally defend business no matter how unethical their practices are just for the sake of pointing out the contrary. And that's ok, it's your prerogative.
But some (people/businesses) have morals, and if it were not government implementing regulations, we would be driving "fold up in a crash" cars, die from untested medicine, and get sick off of meats/food we eat. And yes, some businesses would practice this all in the name getting the mighty dollar.


THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.


Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 2:17 PM on j-body.org
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

...and if it were not government implementing regulations, we would be driving "fold up in a crash" cars, die from untested medicine, and get sick off of meats/food we eat. And yes, some businesses would practice this all in the name getting the mighty dollar.

Wow! Did you see the video of the recent crash testing between a '58 Chevy and a new Malibu? I will never again believe those old behemoths were somehow "safer" due to sheer bulk. The Malibu OWNED the heavier 50-year old dinosaur, whose crushed cabin became a complete death-cell.

Amazing test, great demo of how much safer today's cars are. In a nation where auto accidents remain one of the largest killers, I'm pleased we've made such strides. Imagine the carnage if we had not!





Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 3:43 PM on j-body.org
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

...I don't know...
First honest thing I've read in your posts yet.

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Quote:

What I will say on this entire subject is that, once again, too many people in our society are just taking the easy way out.

That's the American way and history proves that. Hey why did we bring over the blacks over to this nation? I can tell you it wasn't for a cup of tea.
The American way has been hard work and ingenuity. Yeah, there were years where wrong was done on the issue of slavery, but it doesn't cloud the fact that we have been, up until the past 20+ years, a country of people willing to work hard for things. However, we have become an entire fast-food, instant gratification society, where the majority of people are looking for an excuse for everything, and a good life for little work. This is a fairly recent thing in our history, it is not where we came from.

By the way, with regards to your typical childishness, which you just can't seem to help but to resort to; the ones who don't get it very often are the ones who consider it "getting lucky" and feel the need to talk big about their so-called sex life. The rest of us feel no need to make a big thing about it.






Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 4:59 PM on j-body.org
Bill Hahn Jr. wrote:

Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

...and if it were not government implementing regulations, we would be driving "fold up in a crash" cars, die from untested medicine, and get sick off of meats/food we eat. And yes, some businesses would practice this all in the name getting the mighty dollar.

Wow! Did you see the video of the recent crash testing between a '58 Chevy and a new Malibu? I will never again believe those old behemoths were somehow "safer" due to sheer bulk. The Malibu OWNED the heavier 50-year old dinosaur, whose crushed cabin became a complete death-cell.

Amazing test, great demo of how much safer today's cars are. In a nation where auto accidents remain one of the largest killers, I'm pleased we've made such strides. Imagine the carnage if we had not!


Yes indeed Bill, there was a thread on that video here.
http://www.j-body.org/forums/read.php?f=6&i=203550&t=203550#203550

Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:

the ones who don't get it very often are the ones who consider it "getting lucky" and feel the need to talk big about their so-called sex life. The rest of us feel no need to make a big thing about it.


Coming from a person that solely believes in abstinence, your sentence doesn't quite have to much validity now does it?
Shake it easy. lol


THE POLITICALLY INCORRECT ONE.

Re: FDA Tobacco Ban
Tuesday, September 29, 2009 5:20 PM on j-body.org
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:

Greedy Capitalist Pig wrote:

the ones who don't get it very often are the ones who consider it "getting lucky" and feel the need to talk big about their so-called sex life. The rest of us feel no need to make a big thing about it.


Coming from a person that solely believes in abstinence, your sentence doesn't quite have to much validity now does it?
Shake it easy. lol

LMAO. That's really the best you could come up with?

I was going to ask you if you agree that everything you did when you were younger was a good decision, but then I remembered that you haven't grown up, so I guess that would have been a ridiculous question.






Forum Post / Reply
You must log in before you can post or reply to messages.

 

Start New Topic Advanced Search