[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Why do men lose it when their chicky-poo dies?

Christopher Caldwell: How Immigration Is Erasing Whites, Christians, and the Middle Class

SSRI Connection? Another Trans Shooter, Another Massacre – And They Erased His Video

Something 1/2 THE SIZE of the SUN has Entered our Solar System, and We Have NO CLUE What it is...

Massive Property Tax Fraud Exposed - $5.1 Trillion Bond Scam Will Crash System

Israel Sold American Weapons to Azerbaijan to Kill Armenian Christians

Daily MEMES YouTube Hates | YouTube is Fighting ME all the Way | Making ME Remove Memes | Part 188

New fear unlocked while stuck in highway traffic - Indian truck driver on his phone smashes into

RFK Jr. says the largest tech companies will permit Americans to access their personal health data

I just researched this, and it’s true—MUST SEE!!

Savage invader is disturbed that English people exist in an area he thought had been conquered

Jackson Hole's Parting Advice: Accept Even More Migrants To Offset Demographic Collapse, Or Else

Ecuador Angered! China-built Massive Dam is Tofu-Dreg, Ecuador Demands $400 Million Compensation

UK economy on brink of collapse (Needs IMF Bailout)

How Red Light Unlocks Your Body’s Hidden Fat-Burning Switch

The Mar-a-Lago Accord Confirmed: Miran Brings Trump's Reset To The Fed ($8,000 Gold)

This taboo sex act could save your relationship, expert insists: ‘Catalyst for conversations’

LA Police Bust Burglary Crew Suspected In 92 Residential Heists

Top 10 Jobs AI is Going to Wipe Out

It’s REALLY Happening! The Australian Continent Is Drifting Towards Asia

Broken Germany Discovers BRUTAL Reality

Nuclear War, Trump's New $500 dollar note: Armstrong says gold is going much higher

Scientists unlock 30-year mystery: Rare micronutrient holds key to brain health and cancer defense

City of Fort Wayne proposing changes to food, alcohol requirements for Riverfront Liquor Licenses

Cash Jordan: Migrant MOB BLOCKS Whitehouse… Demands ‘11 Million Illegals’ Stay

Not much going on that I can find today

In Britain, they are secretly preparing for mass deaths

These Are The Best And Worst Countries For Work (US Last Place)-Life Balance

These Are The World's Most Powerful Cars

Doctor: Trump has 6 to 8 Months TO LIVE?!


Resistance
See other Resistance Articles

Title: URGENT Save on-line cigarettes, Call your Senator Now
Source: CD2U
URL Source: http://www.cd2u.org/email.html
Published: Nov 4, 2009
Author: CD2U
Post Date: 2009-11-04 12:17:04 by palo verde
Keywords: None
Views: 1300
Comments: 120

By making all cigarettes nonmailable, the Senate is ensuring you will no longer be able to purchase these products by mail-order, telephone order, or over the Internet because the United States Postal Service, along with UPS, Fed-Ex and all other carriers, will be prohibited by law from delivering your orders to you.

*** URGENT - PLEASE CALL BEFORE THURSDAY ***

*** The US Senate committee will be voting this week ***

Your Senators will be voting shortly to make ALL TOBACCO PRODUCTS NON-MAILABLE!!!

WE NEED YOUR HELP TO TELL YOUR SENATORS NOT TO PASS THIS BILL !!!

(This has ALREADY BEEN PASSED in the House of Representatives !!!)

Please contact BOTH your Senators by phone, email, or regular mail.
(We have provided all of their contact information below.)

(You do NOT have to identify yourself as a smoker.)

HOW TO CONTACT YOUR SENATORS:

TELEPHONE: You can directly dial your Senators office using the number shown for them below, or you can dial 1-800-828-0498 (this is a toll-free number) to be connected with a Capitol Switchboard Operator. Simply ask the Operator to connect you with your Senators Office.

Time is crucial at this point, so a phone call is by far the best choice for contacting your Senators.

EMAIL: Simply go to each of your two Senators websites shown above and find the Senators contact form. Fill in the required information, type your message and click the "Send" button.

REGULAR MAIL: Send a letter to your Senator at their LOCAL offices nearest you. You can find the addresses for local offices on the Senators' websites or by looking in your telephone book's government section. It is important that you send your letter to your Senators' local office since mail often takes months to reach a Senator's Washington, DC office due to increased security at the Capitol.

EVERY TELEPHONE CALL, EMAIL AND LETTER MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

YOUR SENATORS NEED TO HEAR FROM YOU ON THIS IMPORTANT ISSUE!

THE SITUATION: Right now there is legislation pending in the United States Senate - the Prevent All Cigarette Trafficking Act of 2009 ("PACT Act") (S.1147) which contains, among other bad ideas, a provision to make ALL cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products nonmailable. This legislation has already been passed by the House of Representatives and is currently in a Senate Committee that could send it to the Senate floor at any time for a vote!

WHAT THIS MEANS TO YOU: By making all cigarettes and smokeless tobacco products nonmailable, the Senate is ensuring you will no longer be able to purchase these products by mail-order, telephone order, or over the Internet because the United States Postal Service, along with UPS, Fed-Ex and all other carriers, will be prohibited by law from delivering your orders to you. Taking away your options means forcing you back to buying over-priced tobacco products from your local retailer once again.

WHY WE NEED YOUR HELP: Native American cigarette and tobacco sellers are committed to doing everything we can to stop the PACT Act, but we need your help. Your Senators work for you and as their constituents, it is your voice and your vote that counts!

WHAT YOU CAN DO: Contact your Senators and tell them not to pass the PACT Act. Your Senators should be protecting your interests, but it is up to you to let them know what you think about the PACT Act. There are three easy ways to contact your Senators - by telephone, email, or regular mail - all of which are explained below. Every state has two Senators - please remember to contact BOTH Senators for your state. At this point time is crucial, so a phone call is by far the best means to use.

YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXPRESS YOUR OPINION: As an American Citizen, it is your right to let your Senators know how you feel about any action Congress takes. You elected your Senators to represent you and they can only do this if you tell them what you want. When you contact your Senator you do not need to identify yourself as a smoker or as someone who purchases cigarettes and/or smokeless tobacco products by mail-order, telephone-order, and/or the Internet. You only need to identify yourself as a resident of the state they represent.

SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE PACT ACT TO DISCUSS WITH YOUR SENATORS:

THE POSTAL SERVICE: The price of stamps is being raised practically every year. The PACT Act will take an entire class of legal, non-hazardous goods and make them nonmailable. What this means is a huge loss of business (potentially hundreds of millions of dollars) for the Postal Service. Will they continue to raise the price of stamps and other mail services to compensate for their lost income? The United States Postal Service is already suffering a fiscal crisis due to the downturn in the economy. If the PACT Act is passed and millions of dollars of revenue are taken away, there could be serious consequences for consumers, including reducing the number of delivery days from 6 per week down to 5 or perhaps only 4 days per week.

COST: When the PACT Act of 2003 (S.1177) passed the Senate, the Congressional Budget Office prepared a Cost Estimate for the Bill. The Congressional Budget Office estimated that the PACT Act of 2003 would cost about $140 MILLION over the 2004-2008 period to enforce. $140 Million over four years - and that estimate is already six years old. How much will the PACT Act of 2009 cost to enforce? Isn't there a better way to spend our tax dollars?

IMPORTANT THINGS TO REMEMBER WHEN COMMUNICATING WITH YOUR SENATORS:

1. Tell your Senators that you are one of their constituents and provide an address so they know where in the state you are from. Since anyone can contact a Senator, it is important that you let your Senators know that you live and vote in their home state. Because the Senators receive so much mail, mail from their constituents always takes priority.

2. Make it clear to your Senators that you DO NOT want them to pass the PACT Act of 2009 (S.1147). Let your Senators know that if they don't support you - you won't support them.

3. This bill presents undue hardship to many smokers who are older, and shut-in with limited mobility. It is unfair to prevent them from ordering tobacco products through home delivery.

4. This bill represents discriminatory pricing as the majority of smokers are lower-income, many on a fixed income. It is discriminatory to force them to pay higher prices.

5. This bill represents discriminatory taxation as smokers were forced to pay an additional increase of more than $7 a carton in new federal taxes earlier this year.

6. This bill represents unlawful double-taxation as Internet and mail-order retailers are already collecting and paying federal and state excise taxes in the state where the tobacco is purchased.

7. This bill represents discriminatory restriction of trade towards smokers as all other lawful products can be purchased through the mail-order and through the Internet. Let your Senators know that if they don't support you - you won't support them.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

Comments (1-25) not displayed.
      .
      .
      .

#26. To: Lod, Ricky J (#22) (Edited)

We hope. ;-)

Ha!

OTOH, I agree with Ricky J. I'm not phoning Congress on this issue. My uncle died of lung cancer. It's a horrible disease to see someone die from. I'm not about to load a pistol for a suicider. Smokers are not having cigarettes removed from the market place, correct? So they still have freedom and liberty to buy cigarettes. They just need to buy them at a store, not online. I like a certain brand of clothes that are not offered online so I need to get in my car and buy that brand at a store - less convenient, but not a major freedom damper.

scrapper2  posted on  2009-11-05   11:05:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#27. To: RickyJ, phantom patriot, Lod, Scrapper2, farmfriend, palo verde, Hayek Fan, all (#16)

Hey, smokers cost more than they are worth. Sorry, but they are a complete and total drain on society. If they could smoke without it affecting others financially or health wise than I wouldn't mind them smoking their lives away. But that is not the case and you know it isn't.

Attaboy!

Regurgitate the propaganda without bothering to actually investigate. Show us your prejudices and repeat the mantra again - "the lying mainstream press that tells us that Vioxx, aspartame, and anti-depressants are good for us has spoken. Tobacco bad! Smokers bad! They should be put in Kamps and made pariahs because they don't use enough of Big Pharma's most profitable products. Why it's unpatriotic is what it is.

Riddle me this Batman?

Japan has DOUBLE the rate of adult smoking of the United States per capita. Japan has HALF the rate of HEART DISEASE. France has a higher rate of smoking and a much lower rate of HEART DISEASE.

Gosh Batman does that mean that there are other factors, like diet, that are being ignored while blaming it all on smoking?

To go easy on you I used to believe the propaganda myself, to some degree, until the contrary evidence began accumulating.

Yes there are some negative effects created by smoking - mostly reduced lung capacity and the possibility of emphysema (Lung Cancer often used as one of the bogeymen is only marginally higher among smokers than non-smokers - there is an increased risk but it is not the universal cause as the propaganda has led people to misbelieve). However, none of the studies which have purported to assign all these negative effects have controlled for other key factors which become more and more apparent as the evidence accumulates such as the chemicals added to commercial cigarettes and the material used for the filters. While there is more than one factor given short shrift diet seems to be the biggest and the average American diet rich in junk, fat, chemicals, and starches while being short on leafy greens, legumes, and phytochemicals is never taken into account in any of the studies purporting to show negative correlations. Due to pressure from alternative practicioners and a growing awareness even in the AMA controlled community it is gradually gaining more attention, BUT Big Food, working with your "good friend" the FDA has also helped to minimize and suppress the information and conclusions because there is little profit in it for Big Pharma if people began to eat a healthier diet and rates of disease went down because of it. Just as the 20 year study done by WHO in Europe, which showed "second hand smoke" as having a prophylactic affect on those exposed, was suppressed, buried, and never released except for the few snippets that leaked out.

So, you may parrot the slanted, distorted, and inaccurate information paraded by the Lamestream media or you may actually examine the evidence and inform yourself beyond regurgitating propaganda. Oh, and do you think cholesterol causes heart disease too?

"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France

Original_Intent  posted on  2009-11-05   11:07:14 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#28. To: RickyJ (#16)

Hey, smokers cost more than they are worth

Balony!! Across this nation SIN TAX on cigs pays for all sorts of social programs for nanny staters.

That massive winfall from the tobacco industry is paying for kids to go to college, paying for state medical freebies and all sorts of lame "prevention" programs that are about as successful as DARE or Just Say No.

Smokers generally die sooner and don't require any additional costs after death. Multitudes of non smokers can live decades in old folks homes. I visit a gal who is 90 years old everyweek. She has no idea what is going on, very little quality of life, but she never did smoke. I've been with her on hospice for two years now. Do you have any idea what that kind of care costs?

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   11:08:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#29. To: phantom patriot, RickyJ (#23)

Most surprising. I thought I'd seen posts where he was espousing LIBERTY.

Yes, I thought so too. I recall discussing the finer points of LIBERTY and FREEDOM on more than one occassion.

I wonder, will he be for the lot of us paying more taxes when there is no more sin tax to collect from cigs? Several dollars from every pack go to pay for all sorts of things that nanny state deems necessary. And shall we all throw more tax dollars at ENFORCEMENT for a newly minted Gistapo to patrol the streets of this nation for cigs, smokers and criminal gangs bringing the masses their fix?

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   11:13:32 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#30. To: palo verde (#0)

Thanks palo! Did my part but it's Md. not sure what good it will do.

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson

phantom patriot  posted on  2009-11-05   11:14:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#31. To: scrapper2 (#26)

I'm not about to load a pistol for a suicider.

When I was little the time I most treasure with my grandpa was making cigs and bullets. He had this little machine that put the filter on and I would load the St. Alberts in the paper. We spent hours while he made bullets and I made his cigs.

Yes, he did die of lung cancer. However, we would not had such good times had he not smoked or loved to shoot black powder. He liked kids to be useful and you had to enjoy the activities he picked to have any fun. I don't feel that I contributed to his death, but rather to his life. He would found some other grandkid to make the smokes if I opted out.

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   11:19:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#32. To: abraxas (#29)

I wonder, will he be for the lot of us paying more taxes when there is no more sin tax to collect from cigs? Several dollars from every pack go to pay for all sorts of things that nanny state deems necessary. And shall we all throw more tax dollars at ENFORCEMENT for a newly minted Gistapo to patrol the streets of this nation for cigs, smokers and criminal gangs bringing the masses their fix?

He and many others have no idea what they are inviting.

I hope he realizes LIBERTY lost, will not be regained easily.

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson

phantom patriot  posted on  2009-11-05   11:19:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#33. To: RickyJ (#16) (Edited)

Sorry, but they are a complete and total drain on society.

There are a lot of complete and total drains on society. When will you and your ilk begin going after them?

If they could smoke without it affecting others financially or health wise than I wouldn't mind them smoking their lives away. But that is not the case and you know it isn't.

The senior citizen population is much more of a drain on society financially and health wise. So are the obese? When do we begin offing them in order to save you money? It sounds like you should apply for the Obama death panels. You'd fit right in.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-11-05   11:20:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#34. To: abraxas, phantom patriot, Ricky J (#29) (Edited)

Most surprising. I thought I'd seen posts where he was espousing LIBERTY.

Yes, I thought so too. I recall discussing the finer points of LIBERTY and FREEDOM on more than one occassion.

Sorry, but I'm not "getting" the Paul Revere vibes emoting from this issue that you seem to be feeling.

Smokers have the freedom to buy cigarettes in a stand up store, correct?

So how does online cigarette buying being removed as an option take away smokers' freedom and liberty when 24 hour convenience stores, grocery stores, still sell cigarettes?

Can you buy everything your heart desires online? I sure can't. So is our freedom and liberty under assault because we can't buy everything online but need to go to a stand up store?

scrapper2  posted on  2009-11-05   11:26:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#35. To: Original_Intent, RickyJ (#27)

So, you may parrot the slanted, distorted, and inaccurate information paraded by the Lamestream media or you may actually examine the evidence and inform yourself beyond regurgitating propaganda. Oh, and do you think cholesterol causes heart disease too?

Give em what for OI. My Granny lived to be 98. She smoked and we had fat back for breakfast every morn. Of course this was country fresh.

Splain dat Lucy errr Ricky!

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson

phantom patriot  posted on  2009-11-05   11:27:16 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#36. To: scrapper2 (#34)

Smokers have the freedom to buy cigarettes in a stand up store, correct?

So how does online cigarette buying being removed as an option take away smokers' freedom and liberty when 24 hour convenience stores, grocery stores, still sell cigarettes?

Because the option is being removed by government. People have the right to engage in peaceful trade as they wish. Government interference in any market mechanism that peddles legal, peaceful products is an infringement of liberty on the seller, as well as the customers who use that mechanism. The liberty in question being the right to association (via peaceful trade) being infringed.

Can you buy everything your heart desires online? I sure can't. So is our freedom and liberty under assault because we can't buy everything online but need to go to a stand up store?

What you can't buy, you presumably can't buy because no vendor has thought to offer the product online. That's not a loss of liberty, nobody is standing outside as a third party between you and the producer of your favorite products saying "THOU SHALL NOT!". It's only that third party that causes the infringement, sort of definitionally.

All of this said, I think we all have much bigger fish to fry right now than online cigarettes. We're about to have our economy and remaining macro liberties swallowed wholesale, while we're ditering on the fringes.

MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-11-05   11:31:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#37. To: scrapper2 (#34)

Smokers have the freedom to buy cigarettes in a stand up store, correct?

Yes, What is your point? There is more choice online. Tobacco that is natural and not tainted with chems. I'll bet every store will stock up on those now.

Also by buying the products individually and not manufactured we have until now been able to avoid some taxes.

All of this is really moot. They are going to create another black market that they will consider us criminals but behind the scene make profit upon.

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson

phantom patriot  posted on  2009-11-05   11:35:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#38. To: SonOfLiberty, Ricky J (#36)

All of this said, I think we all have much bigger fish to fry right now than online cigarettes. We're about to have our economy and remaining macro liberties swallowed wholesale, while we're ditering on the fringes.

Well said.

And I recall Ricky J making a similar observation in msg. #5.

scrapper2  posted on  2009-11-05   11:36:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#39. To: scrapper2 (#34)

Smokers have the freedom to buy cigarettes in a stand up store, correct?

So how does online cigarette buying being removed as an option take away smokers' freedom and liberty when 24 hour convenience stores, grocery stores, still sell cigarettes?

Smokers should be the only group forced to pay state tax levied on a product when all other products could be purchased online for less?

Why should one product be held captive to state tax revenue schemes? Would you promote this for other products as well? If a tax on soda comes into effect, for instance, internet sales should be abolished for the greater good?

This is huge revenue for states:

Minnesota slapped an extra 75-cent charge on a pack of cigarettes because of budget problems two years ago. The state expects to collect about $451 million from smokers this year but is projecting a drop of about 1 percent a year, or $4 million to $5 million — and that is does not even take into account the potential effect of a statewide smoking ban.

California banned smoking in bars and restaurants in 1998 and raised its cigarette tax 50 cents a pack in 1999. Tobacco tax revenue boomed, then started to decline. It has leveled off at about $1 billion a year in the past few years, thanks to a crackdown on counterfeit tax stamps, said Anita Gore, a spokeswoman for California Board of Equalization.

What this plan does is hold smokers captive to states taxing smokers ad nauseum, which does take away from smokers' freedom and liberty to purchase a product at the best price under a FREE MARKET system.

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   11:38:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#40. To: scrapper2 (#34)

Sorry, but I'm not "getting" the Paul Revere vibes emoting from this issue that you seem to be feeling.

Smokers have the freedom to buy cigarettes in a stand up store, correct?

So by your logic, if the government removed the food supply from the free market and provided everything themselves, then we will have not lost any freedom because the items that we need/want are being provided.

Sorry. I disagree.

Whenever the government steps in and says "you can't do this" or "you can't do that" they they are taking away a freedom.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-11-05   11:39:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#41. To: abraxas, all (#28)

Something the nanny staters really don't like to hear is that the oldest woman in the world, who died last year in her 120's, was a smoker. Although she did cut down in her 90's, and had to start sneaking them after she became the oldest woman in the world because her "nannies" didn't approve (she also had a fondness for red wine).

My grandfather who was active all the way into his 99th year was a smoker. He quit though because he started believing the propaganda - when he was 85. He died ten days short of his 100th birthday from a kidney infection unrelated to smoking or age.

The last oldest man in America still smoked a cigar a day at 113.

And as you correctly point out the amount collected in tobacco taxes has long since surpassed any supposed additional costs created by the ill effects of smoking (which again have been greatly exaggerated).

All of the factors affecting people in their later years are not known. One thing that has surfaced in a couple of studies released in the last 2 or 3 years is that smokers have a lower rate of Alzheimer's Disease and remain mentally alert and active later in life. That is not my opinion but a result found in valid research.

However, it is NOT my argument that smoking is a health benefit or good for one, but simply that the negative effects have been exaggerated and oversold to suit another agenda. Just as Saccarhine was torpedoed with bogus experiments to pave the way for the much more toxic aspartame (a.k.a. Nutra-SweetDeath).

It never ceases to amaze me that people who do not trust the mainstream media to report on political issues will nevertheless take their reportage on other issues as gospel - never accounting for the fact that their reportage is heavily influenced by large advertisers (they are in the advertising not news business) such as BIG PHARMA and BIG FOOD. Take for example the two reporters for a Florida Station that were fired because they would not lie about the ill effects of RBGH (Recombinant Bovine Growth Hormone) which they had uncovered in their research for a story on it. Monsanto, a BIG advertiser, wanted the story modified to promote their product.

"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France

Original_Intent  posted on  2009-11-05   11:40:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#42. To: Original_Intent (#41)

it is NOT my argument that smoking is a health benefit or good for one, but simply that the negative effects have been exaggerated and oversold to suit another agenda.

Excellent post.

I agree completely. I adamently support the freedom to make that individual choice and not be told by the goobermint what one can and cannot do. People should be able to shop for the best prices too and not be held captive to state revenue schemes.

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   11:46:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#43. To: phantom patriot (#37)

Yes, What is your point? There is more choice online. Tobacco that is natural and not tainted with chems. I'll bet every store will stock up on those now.

Also by buying the products individually and not manufactured we have until now been able to avoid some taxes.

My point is that the issue has little to do with an assault on smokers' freedom and more to do with smokers as consumers being somewhat inconvenienced. Join the rest of the consumer world.

Promoting a minor inconvenience as an assault on freedom and liberty is a no sale for me. Sorry.

scrapper2  posted on  2009-11-05   11:47:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#44. To: all (#0)

United States Postal Service, along with UPS, Fed-Ex and all other carriers, will be prohibited by law from delivering your orders to you.

Should these business be forced out of market share and business by this idiotic prohibition?

It's not only the smokers who are getting reamed but distribution businesses as well......and for what? Cui Bono?

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   11:48:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#45. To: scrapper2 (#34)

So how does online cigarette buying being removed as an option take away smokers' freedom and liberty when 24 hour convenience stores, grocery stores, still sell cigarettes?

Earth to Scrapper2!

Earth to Scrapper2!

It is called freedom of choice.

I purchase mail order because I choose not to buy the chemical laced cigarettes sold in "convenience" stores. I purchase an all natural chemically untreated tobacco of much much higher quality for about the same price via mail order. It is convenience and availability of a higher quality product. It is also called freedom.

Freedom is not stolen, generally, in one fell swoop. It is eroded one little step at a time by taking little freedoms in increasing numbers.

The "it does not affect me" is the very attitude which will affect you when other people cop the same attitude over some small liberty which you enjoy. "Why should I care if they take the bloops off to camps? I'm not a bloop."

"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France

Original_Intent  posted on  2009-11-05   11:55:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#46. To: Original_Intent (#45)

I've heard of a movement of people growing their own tobacco. I wonder if it's viable in Ohio (where I live)? Would seem to be a great place to make some extra cash.

MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-11-05   11:56:59 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#47. To: scrapper2 (#43)

My point is that the issue has little to do with an assault on smokers' freedom and more to do with smokers as consumers being somewhat inconvenienced. Join the rest of the consumer world.

As a consumer, please list all of the other products you would like to not be able to purchase online. What other products would you like limited access to and increased inconvenience to get the best possible price? What other products would you like to pay more in taxes to prop up state budgets?

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   12:03:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#48. To: Hayek Fan (#40)

So by your logic, if the government removed the food supply from the free market and provided everything themselves, then we will have not lost any freedom because the items that we need/want are being provided.

The gov't is not removing the ability for smokers to buy cigarettes. They are just taking away the option of buying cigarettes online, an option which did not exist since time immemorial, btw.

Sorry, I'm not buying this as an assault on freedom and liberty. This is all about $ - the gubment wants to make more because it doesn't want to reduce expenses. The smokers want to save a few cents of sales tax on their consumer item. Btw, most/all purchases I make online are taxed - this is news to me that online sales of cigarettes had no sales tax.

In any event, with all that gubment is planning to do in regards to assaulting our liberty and freedom in big ways - not just sales tax and online shopping convenience - I'm not seeing this as a particularly grave matter. But knock yourself out.

scrapper2  posted on  2009-11-05   12:04:56 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#49. To: Original_Intent (#27)

(Lung Cancer often used as one of the bogeymen is only marginally higher among smokers than non-smokers - there is an increased risk but it is not the universal cause as the propaganda has led people to misbelieve)

Hence the need for "second hand smoke".


"Greenhouse gases do not act as a blanket around the earth and they do not keep the atmosphere warm. ... greenhouse gases emit more radiation than they absorb and this ongoing radiation loss tends to cool the atmosphere at between 1C and 2C per day, a fact known for more than 50 years. And yet we continue to get the simplistic explanation that greenhouse gases warm the atmosphere and so more greenhouse gases will warm the atmosphere more. No wonder the public is taken in!" --William Kininmonth, meteorologist , 1791

farmfriend  posted on  2009-11-05   12:05:19 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#50. To: farmfriend (#49)

Hence the need for "second hand smoke".

And no debate on chemtrails......nothing to see here looky lous, just dispensing unknown products overhead day in and day out. Focus your concern on second hand smoke while we put GMO products into the food chain with no labels to inform you of what you are eating. Focus on second hand smoke and pushing small business owners into enforcing no smoking in their bars while we import deadly dry wall products from China and trash manufacturing in this nation for "environmental" concerns such as "clean air."

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   12:09:45 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#51. To: SonOfLiberty, all (#46)

I've heard of a movement of people growing their own tobacco. I wonder if it's viable in Ohio (where I live)? Would seem to be a great place to make some extra cash.

That is the direction some are headed. Taxes have now been jacked up to the point that some people are finding that they would rather cut out the tax man and grow their own for pennies a pound.

My guess is that is the next avenue that they will try to cut off - people growing their own.

There is another agenda at play in the war on smokers that I have not completely fathomed - it is not just the taxes because taxes have been jacked up the Laffer Curve well past the point of diminishing returns. They could actually, at this point, lower taxes and increase the take on volume.

As well mail order does not adversely affect the Feds because the tax is collected from the wholesalers in every state. The only ones whining are the states that have jacked the taxes up so high that people have sought out legal means of avoiding them.

There is another agenda at play.

The government does not give a shit about our health so that is not the motivation. If they did they would outlaw products such as aspartame (which has many more adverse side effects than smoking).

No, there is an interest pushing this agenda but data insufficient to say exactly who or why.

I do know that smokers use fewer anti-depressants so I suspect that as one of the motives but that is not the only one.

"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France

Original_Intent  posted on  2009-11-05   12:15:22 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#52. To: Original_Intent (#51)

I wish I could remember the name of that jackass woman running around country by country organizing anti-smoking pushes and ultimately legislation. I think I heard that she is from Australia. From what I've read, she's behind every single push in the West thus far, from the EU to Australia to New Zealand to the U.S. to Canada.

Gosh, what's her name? She would be a good place to start I think.

MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-11-05   12:17:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#53. To: abraxas (#47)

Particular brand name clothing and shoes I can only buy at stand up stores. That's an inconvenience but certainly not an assault on my liberty.

Regarding sales taxes, you're talking to a consumer taxpayer who lives in a area that probably has the highest sales tax rate in the nation. So while I can understand why smokers are peeved that a free-of-sales tax option has been taken away from them, it was a unique perk that most other online consumers did not enjoy, and I still don't view this matter as a threat to their/our collective liberty.

If you want to march on DC against the idea of gubment arbitrarily adding sales taxes to consumer goods, I'll join you but to get in fluff about smokers now having to pay sales tax on their in store cigarette purchases, is to miss the elephant in the room which you and previous generations have acquiesed to accepting as a "right" of government to generate income to waste.

scrapper2  posted on  2009-11-05   12:17:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#54. To: scrapper2 (#48)

The gov't is not removing the ability for smokers to buy cigarettes. They are just taking away the option of buying cigarettes online, an option which did not exist since time immemorial, btw.

And if the government outlawed the sale of food by private business so that they could sell it themselves then they would not be taking away the ability of the public to buy food, they would just be taking away the option of buying food from private business. It's the same argument.

Btw, most/all purchases I make online are taxed - this is news to me that online sales of cigarettes had no sales tax.

I do not smoke so I do not know the details but I was under the impression that most of the web sites selling cheap cigarettes were run by various Indian tribes. They are not required to pay federal, state or local taxes. I know this to be true because I live very close to Oklahoma and you can't spit in Oklahoma without running into an Indian cigarette shop.

I'm not seeing this as a particularly grave matter.

Most Americans don't care about that which doesn't affect them. Hence the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, and thousands of other laws and regulations passed by the government. However, while one little cut on your finger may not kill you, thousands of little cuts all over your body will. That's exactly where we are at today. The government is cutting our bodies in as many different places as they can and we are being bled dry. Is it the most important thing going on in the country? No. But that doesn't mean it should be ignored either.

"The Central Intelligence Agency owns everyone of any significance in the major media." ~ William Colby, Director, CIA 1973–1976

The purpose of the legal system is to protect the elites from the wrath of those they plunder.- Elliott Jackalope

"When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that justifies it." - Frederic Bastiat

F.A. Hayek Fan  posted on  2009-11-05   12:20:17 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#55. To: abraxas, scrapper2, all (#47)

My point is that the issue has little to do with an assault on smokers' freedom and more to do with smokers as consumers being somewhat inconvenienced. Join the rest of the consumer world.

As a consumer, please list all of the other products you would like to not be able to purchase online. What other products would you like limited access to and increased inconvenience to get the best possible price? What other products would you like to pay more in taxes to prop up state budgets?

Clothing, gourmet foods, liquor, fishing tackle, and anything else I damn well please. What I purchase online is in the final analysis irrelevant. The principle of liberty involved is that it is my choice to purchase online or not - at my whim. That is what freedom is - the ability to do what you please when you please. Nothing more, nothing less.

The average American now pays in excess of 40 to 50 percent of their earnings in taxes of one form or another. Even the most draconian and rapacious feudal lords in the Dark ages took no more than 1/3.

Think about that.

At what point does taxation become enslavement?

"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France

Original_Intent  posted on  2009-11-05   12:22:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#56. To: scrapper2 (#53)

Particular brand name clothing and shoes I can only buy at stand up stores. That's an inconvenience but certainly not an assault on my liberty.

That is by your choice.

You CAN purchase other makes if you choose to.

You are not required by any law or edict to purchase "designer" brands or merchandise. Personally I REFUSE to buy logo'ed merchandise I find it pretentious and tacky. If some manufacturer wants me to wear their advertising they can pay me to do so and I am not so insecure that I have to wear a logo to show "I'm in". I purchase those items of clothing which I like (generally classic styles like the Merino Wool Shawl Collar Cardigan Sweater I'm currently wearing - purchased online at a HUGE discount).

"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France

Original_Intent  posted on  2009-11-05   12:29:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#57. To: scrapper2 (#53)

but to get in fluff about smokers now having to pay sales tax on their in store cigarette purchases, is to miss the elephant in the room which you and previous generations have acquiesed to accepting as a "right" of government to generate income to waste.

I disagree.

First they come for the smokers, you do nothing because you don't smoke.

Next they come for the drinkers, you do nothing because you don't drink.

Next they come for the free thinkings...................

Next they come for the gun owners................

You, I think, miss the elephant in the room in that if you allow the freedoms of one group to go under assualt and do nothing, then the assault (the elephant) will continue until it does impact you personally. That's my "fluff" on this issue and this is a legitimate fluff.

I'm surprised at your willingness to have the goobermint single out one group and one product for unequal access and consumer freedom. Tell me, where does this slippery slope end for you?

I disagree with the entire premise of sin tax and always have. Of course, this crap legislation sails through because so many people say, "well, I don't smoke so who cares if this group pays more." If people stood on principle, rather than personal choices, then they would not have let this elephant get out of hand to the extent that it has. I don't see how allowing more and more and more infringment reduces this income to waste problem, in fact, it exacerbates the problem.

abraxas  posted on  2009-11-05   12:31:04 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#58. To: Hayek Fan (#54)

Most Americans don't care about that which doesn't affect them. Hence the Patriot Act, Military Commissions Act, and thousands of other laws and regulations passed by the government

The Patriot Act and Military Commissions Act were grave assaults on liberty and freedom that all of us here recognized as such. But this matter is from my view a matter of inconvenience and saving sales tax $. In no way does this matter compare to the Patriot Act or Military Commissions Act. Now if you said that gubment arbitrarily imposing sales tax on consumer items to generate income was an assault on on our liberty, I'd be with you but you are not saying that. In fact, you and others here as per generations before you have accepted sales taxes as gubment's right to generate income [to waste on useless programs]. To be selective in your outrage re: sales taxes doesn't fly with me. You fret about the small cut, but you have accepted the big gouge.

scrapper2  posted on  2009-11-05   12:31:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#59. To: SonOfLiberty (#52)

I wish I could remember the name of that jackass woman running around country by country organizing anti-smoking pushes and ultimately legislation. I think I heard that she is from Australia. From what I've read, she's behind every single push in the West thus far, from the EU to Australia to New Zealand to the U.S. to Canada.

Gosh, what's her name? She would be a good place to start I think.

Where I would go would be to "follow the money". Who is funding her "crusade"? My guess would be that like "CHAD" (an advocacy front group for the so-called learning disabled) which promotes the use of drugs like Ritalin and Adderol whose financial support comes from Big Pharma. No doubt in my mind that someone with a different agenda is funding this woman - likely through conduits and cut-outs to make it harder to trace.

"An education isn't how much you have committed to memory, or even how much you know. It's being able to differentiate between what you know and what you don't. ~ Anatole France

Original_Intent  posted on  2009-11-05   12:36:06 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#60. To: SonOfLiberty, RickyJ (#24)

I can't recall a time when a smoker cost me money involuntarily. Not one time.

Your health insurance premiums are higher due to smokers.

belmontconservative  posted on  2009-11-05   12:37:38 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#61. To: Original_Intent (#59)

Right, what I mean is that by knowing her name you'd have a clear starting point to begin looking behind the scenes. I'll see if I can locate her name.

MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-11-05   12:38:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#62. To: belmontconservative (#60)

I can't recall a time when a smoker cost me money involuntarily. Not one time. Your health insurance premiums are higher due to smokers.

So your claim is that I have insurance involuntarily? It's a legal mandate that I own insurance at this date? Show me the law.

MapQuest really needs to start their directions on #5. Pretty sure I know how to get out of my neighborhood.

SonOfLiberty  posted on  2009-11-05   12:39:43 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#63. To: scrapper2 (#48)

This is all about $ - the gubment wants to make more because it doesn't want to reduce expenses.

Read this part of your post again. Then tell me this isn't a problem in itself.

"What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that its people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms....The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." Thomas Jefferson

phantom patriot  posted on  2009-11-05   12:43:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#64. To: abraxas (#31)

Yes, he did die of lung cancer. However, we would not had such good times had he not smoked or loved to shoot black powder. He liked kids to be useful and you had to enjoy the activities he picked to have any fun. I don't feel that I contributed to his death, but rather to his life. He would found some other grandkid to make the smokes if I opted out.

You would have had a longer time together had he not smoked. Maybe you would have had good times had he not smoked such as taking hikes, etc.

belmontconservative  posted on  2009-11-05   12:43:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#65. To: abraxas (#57)

I'm surprised at your willingness to have the goobermint single out one group and one product for unequal access and consumer freedom. Tell me, where does this slippery slope end for you?

There is no slippery slope for me - perhaps for you - you allow yourself to slide until a small bump causes aggravation. I resent the whole idea of sales taxes being arbitrarily imposed by government on all of us. I resent the whole idea of income taxes being collected by government, period, and particularly so when they are "graduated" and continually increasing. But you seem to resent gubment taxes only when a small sub-category catches your interest to trumpet about.

I'm tired of debating this miniscule issue with you. Call Congress. Better still march on Congress so smokers can buy cigarettes online without sales tax. Go for it!

But I fear you are focusing on the ant while the tiger is about to devour you - in case you have forgotten, a grandiose assault on our liberty and freedom will be voted on by Congress on Saturday.

scrapper2  posted on  2009-11-05   12:45:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  



      .
      .
      .

Comments (66 - 120) not displayed.

TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest


[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]