Republican senator seeks to outlaw tobacco

[IntoxiNation]

Well here's a new twist:

TheHill.com - Republican senator seeks to outlaw tobacco

Yeah because outlawing other things, like marijuana, has kept it off the streets

 

[RandallFlagg]

This is kind of a misleading article. The headline reads like he's actually working towards this goal, but he's actually pointing out the hypocracy of the bill that they're debating on right now.

They also call the recent increase in tobacco taxes, "Fees," and make no mention on the increase in RYO tobacco from $12.00 per pound to $50.00.

 

[mamacat]

EDIT - Posted in haste. When I have more time I will review it again. Sorry......

 

[playerags]

Taken completely out of context.
What he is trying to say is the waxman bill is a complete waste of time and, the supporters of this bill don't really give a crap about the health of the american people.

 

[Uncle Bill]

It's curious how all these discussions in Washington about banning or regulating tobacco products do not specifically address the addictive culprit, nicotine. It's all about tobacco as a dirty nicotine delivery system. This may be a good thing for us denizens of Vapesville. Doesn't this leave the door open for other, cleaner means of humoring our nicotine habit? Or am I missing something?

 

[TropicalBob]

You're missing something.

If it's not tobacco, it's a drug. FDA.
If it is tobacco .. FDA .. once this bill becomes law. And no new nicotine delivery systems will be approved (in the foreseeable future).

Lose-lose.

Clean methods to humor your nicotine habit are available from Big Pharma. That's the answer everyone supporting alternative delivery systems gets from anti's and government. And they want you to kick it, not continue it. There's no category for "lifetime nicotine addict support."

 

[Vicks Vap-oh-Yeah]

Clean methods to humor your nicotine habit are available from Big Pharma. That's the answer everyone supporting alternative delivery systems gets from anti's and government. And they want you to kick it, not continue it. There's no category for "lifetime nicotine addict support."

And this sentiment is about ONLY because the traditional nicotine delivery system for long term recreational use has been, up to this point, a very dirty delivery system....tobacco.

Again, I have to say, as I have said before....it's a perception, an image, which needs to be changed.... a task worthy of Mohammed moving the Mountain, a spoonful at a time.

Now, once you tie in other psychological factors, namely the fanatical approach of the antis and the $$'s everyone is tossing around Washington, and you've just taken away the spoon, handed him a stick, and doubled the size of the mountain.

All we can do, as consumers, is continue to offer our stories, our fears, and our intimate knowledge of our products. Educate, inform, tell your story, show off your PV, and pretty soon, you've got 1000 people taking handsful of dirt from the mountain, with more coming (and look, maybe someone will show up with a backhoe!)

Optimistic. Yes. But I refuse to allow myself to wallow in the alternative.

 

[Palmetto]

Taken completely out of context.
What he is trying to say is the waxman bill is a complete waste of time and, the supporters of this bill don't really give a crap about the health of the american people.

Agreed. It's pretty much an "in your face" challenge, to highlight the hypocrisy of it all -- but it will be interpreted in the worst possible light by a largely uninformed media and/or politicians.

 

[BARENETTED]

Great - then they can arrest you for growing tobacco in your garden!

However, I can always buy PG from my Pharmacy and flavorings from Lorann.

Just one more idiot on the Hill.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Great - then they can arrest you for growing tobacco in your garden!

Wait. HUH? Where's that in the bill?

 

[playerags]

Great - then they can arrest you for growing tobacco in your garden!

However, I can always buy PG from my Pharmacy and flavorings from Lorann.

Just one more idiot on the Hill.

Don't believe this left wing media bull****!
He said if the supporters of this bill (democrats) really cared about the health of people (which they don't), they would outlaw tobacco all together.
But this piece of literature has put it's spin on. Saying he wants to outlaw tobacco.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Don't believe this left wing media bull****!
He said if the supporters of this bill (democrats) really cared about the health of people (which they don't), they would outlaw tobacco all together.
But this piece of literature has put it's spin on. Saying he wants to outlaw tobacco.

Nice to know that others here have the same stripes as myself.

 

[TropicalBob]

This is NOT "left-wing media" BS or an attempt at humor on the senator's part. Coburn is a practicing physician, the only one in the Senate, and is vehemently anti all things tobacco. His sentiment is serious and honest, but he's not proposing any prohibition bill. He was speaking (I heard him deliver those remarks) on the present Family Smoking bill.

He called out the Senate for not having the balls to ban the cause of the problem: Tobacco. But read his statement further and know that he is no friend of e-smoking or any other harm alternative.

“If we really want to make a difference in health and we want to eliminate dependence on tobacco, what we have to do is to stop the addiction,” Coburn said during floor debate.

Stop the addiction! Eliminate access to nicotine that is the root of the addiction. That's what he would like done.

Note that the most pro-tobacco senator, Richard Burr, also challenged the Senate for not having the courage to ban tobacco products. He was rubbing their faces in the false promises accompanying this bill under consideration. No way does he want a ban.

Don't brush off serious senatorial debate with slurs about media or government or Obama. Get your own arguments in line, for the time you'll need them.

 

[playerags]

TB, sadly, I missed Senator Coburn on cspan so I went to his site. You say he is no friend to e-cigarettes. According to his site he is a friend of Senator Burr's proposed amendment so, I don't know where you get that he isn't a friend to e-smoking. Link? Like I said, I didn't see him on the floor.
What his site did say is that if the amendment wasn't going to pass the senate, he would like to propose another amendment that would have to study the success of the current bill.

As far as the left wing media bias, I know it probably stings a little bit when you hear that. Most members, or former members of the media don't think there is a such thing. But I call a spade a spade.

 

[RandallFlagg]

TB, sadly, I missed Senator Coburn on cspan so I went to his site. You say he is no friend to e-cigarettes. According to his site he is a friend of Senator Burr's proposed amendment so, I don't know where you get that he isn't a friend to e-smoking. Link? Like I said, I didn't see him on the floor.
What his site did say is that if the amendment wasn't going to pass the senate, he would like to propose another amendment that would have to study the success of the current bill.

As far as the left wing media bias, I know it probably stings a little bit when you hear that. Most members, or former members of the media don't think there is a such thing. But I call a spade a spade.

Personally, I don't believe that ecigs have ANY friends in Washington.
They represent a threat to their tobacco tax revenue.
We need to grow in number. And quickly.

 

[TropicalBob]

And you are entitled to do so, Player. It just wasn't an issue in this case, since the publication was The Hill.

(Those Senate hearings are first-rate "reality" TV. I see my life passing in front of me ...)

P.S. Sen. Burr has been most vocal for harm reduction products. Do not put all your marbles on e-cigs. You need to also support -- equally as strongly -- snus, dissolvables and nasal snuff. All are less harmful, along with e-cigs. We either get harm reduction support, or we die in a mass tragedy of good intentions gone wrong.

 

[OutWest]

Whilst I did get the opportunity to chat with Coburn one-on-one regarding this bill, I didnt get but a few minutes, so I dont know his full stance on all aspects of the bill. I can say, though, that he is against the bill and thinks it's wrong to put the FDA in charge of tobacco, if for no other reason than the fact that it goes against the entire principles and purpose of the FDA. He also understood the concept and value of harm reduction products.

 

[Kendra]

This is NOT "left-wing media" BS or an attempt at humor on the senator's part. Coburn is a practicing physician, the only one in the Senate, and is vehemently anti all things tobacco. His sentiment is serious and honest, but he's not proposing any prohibition bill. He was speaking (I heard him deliver those remarks) on the present Family Smoking bill.

He called out the Senate for not having the balls to ban the cause of the problem: Tobacco. But read his statement further and know that he is no friend of e-smoking or any other harm alternative.



Stop the addiction! Eliminate access to nicotine that is the root of the addiction. That's what he would like done.

Note that the most pro-tobacco senator, Richard Burr, also challenged the Senate for not having the courage to ban tobacco products. He was rubbing their faces in the false promises accompanying this bill under consideration. No way does he want a ban.

Don't brush off serious senatorial debate with slurs about media or government or Obama. Get your own arguments in line, for the time you'll need them.

No, I disagree. Coburn is opposed to the Waxman bill and he is saying so in the strongest possible terms. He's calling those FOR the bill (democrats, mostly) on their hypocrisy.

Playerags is right about this one. The fact that Coburn is a physician only underscores his point.