Banned On The Run

[weltschmerz]

Trump wants to ban flavored e-cigarettes as concern grows about vaping

"We may very well have to do something very, very strong about it," the president said Wednesday at the White House. "We can't allow people to get sick. People are dying."

www.cnet.com/news/trump-wants-to-ban-flavored-e-cigarettes-as-concern-grows-about-vaping/

Oh wait! On second thought, let them die!


Trump Ditches Flavored Vape Ban After Learning His Supporters Like to Vape

slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/11/trump-reversal-flavored-e-cigarette-vape-ban.html

[Tennesseer]

Yup.  trump cannot afford to lose votes so let Americans get sick from vaping.

#FUCKINGSAD

[Miss Tequila]

We all know that cigarettes cause lung cancer.  Why haven't the democrats banned cigarettes?  I actually think both should be banned, btw.  

[Gardening Grandma]

Nov 18, 2019 18:57:47 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

We all know that cigarettes cause lung cancer.  Why haven't the democrats banned cigarettes?  I actually think both should be banned, btw.  

How can the Dems ban cigarettes? They’ve passed all kinds of bills that Moscow Mitch is just sitting on.
Of course, the Dems don’t have executive power - the guy who does hasn’t acted on cigarettes.

I do agree that both should be banned as a health hazard.

[Tennesseer]

Nov 18, 2019 18:57:47 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

We all know that cigarettes cause lung cancer.  Why haven't the democrats banned cigarettes?  I actually think both should be banned, btw.  

Why haven't the Republicans banned cigarettes? Also smoking tobacco is grown in Republican controlled states.

[Miss Tequila]

Nov 18, 2019 21:31:01 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Nov 18, 2019 18:57:47 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

We all know that cigarettes cause lung cancer.  Why haven't the democrats banned cigarettes?  I actually think both should be banned, btw.  

How can the Dems ban cigarettes? They’ve passed all kinds of bills that Moscow Mitch is just sitting on.
Of course, the Dems don’t have executive power - the guy who does hasn’t acted on cigarettes.

I do agree that both should be banned as a health hazard.

We’ve known that cigarettes cause cancer for years. The man in the White House has only been there for 3 years.

ETA: are you saying the Democrats put up a bill to ban cigarettes and Mitch refused to put it for a vote?

[Miss Tequila]

Nov 18, 2019 21:32:48 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Nov 18, 2019 18:57:47 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

We all know that cigarettes cause lung cancer.  Why haven't the democrats banned cigarettes?  I actually think both should be banned, btw.  

Why haven't the Republicans banned cigarettes? Also smoking tobacco is grown in Republican controlled states.

I know where tobacco is grown. Democrats are the ones that want to pass all kinds of legislation to protect people. Why not ban cigarettes?

[Tennesseer]

Nov 18, 2019 21:36:31 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:31:01 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

How can the Dems ban cigarettes? They’ve passed all kinds of bills that Moscow Mitch is just sitting on.
Of course, the Dems don’t have executive power - the guy who does hasn’t acted on cigarettes.

I do agree that both should be banned as a health hazard.

We’ve known that cigarettes cause cancer for years. The man in the White House has only been there for 3 years.

The guy in the White House for three years was all for putting restrictions on vaping products until he found out he would lose votes in the 2020 elections because vaping businesses would close.

Meanwhile, the guy in the White House for three year's wife is campaigning to stop vaping.

[Artemis Windsong]

The best solution.  Ban dying.   End of story.

[Tennesseer]

Nov 18, 2019 21:39:07 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:32:48 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Why haven't the Republicans banned cigarettes? Also smoking tobacco is grown in Republican controlled states.

I know where tobacco is grown. Democrats are the ones that want to pass all kinds of legislation to protect people. Why not ban cigarettes?

How do you know they haven't tried?

Mitch McConnell is a recipient of tobacco industry 'donations'. Kentucky is the second largest grower of smoking tobacco.

[Miss Tequila]

Nov 18, 2019 21:44:11 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:39:07 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

I know where tobacco is grown. Democrats are the ones that want to pass all kinds of legislation to protect people. Why not ban cigarettes?

How do you know they haven't tried?

Mitch McConnell is a recipient of tobacco industry 'donations'. Kentucky is the second largest grower of smoking tobacco.

And show me where they have

And why nothing before 2014? You can’t blame Mitch for that since he wasn’t the senate majority then

[Miss Tequila]

Nov 18, 2019 21:41:08 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:36:31 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

We’ve known that cigarettes cause cancer for years. The man in the White House has only been there for 3 years.

The guy in the White House for three years was all for putting restrictions on vaping products until he found out he would lose votes in the 2020 elections because vaping businesses would close.

Meanwhile, the guy in the White House for three year's wife is campaigning to stop vaping.

And from what I’ve read, cigarettes are much more dangerous than valuing. How we could ban vaping and not cigarettes is beyond me

Do you not think cigarettes are dangerous? Let’s compare cigarette related deaths with gun deaths. Why are the dems pushing for a cigarette ban?

I know why the republicans aren’t and I disagree with them. But why aren’t the dems? They are supposed to be the party concerned only about the health and safety of citizens.

[Tennesseer]

Nov 18, 2019 21:45:16 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:44:11 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

How do you know they haven't tried?

Mitch McConnell is a recipient of tobacco industry 'donations'. Kentucky is the second largest grower of smoking tobacco.

And show me where they have

And why nothing before 2014? You can’t blame Mitch for that since he wasn’t the senate majority then

Your the one who said dems have done nothing. You look it up.

[Tennesseer]

Nov 18, 2019 21:50:16 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:41:08 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

The guy in the White House for three years was all for putting restrictions on vaping products until he found out he would lose votes in the 2020 elections because vaping businesses would close.

Meanwhile, the guy in the White House for three year's wife is campaigning to stop vaping.

And from what I’ve read, cigarettes are much more dangerous than valuing. How we could ban vaping and not cigarettes is beyond me

Do you not think cigarettes are dangerous? Let’s compare cigarette related deaths with gun deaths. Why are the dems pushing for a cigarette ban?

I know why the republicans aren’t and I disagree with them. But why aren’t the dems? They are supposed to be the party concerned only about the health and safety of citizens.

Quite a lot of vaping diseases in a very short period of time the product has been available.

And stick with the vaping discussion. You're all over the fucking place.

[weltschmerz]

Nov 18, 2019 21:50:16 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:41:08 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

The guy in the White House for three years was all for putting restrictions on vaping products until he found out he would lose votes in the 2020 elections because vaping businesses would close.

Meanwhile, the guy in the White House for three year's wife is campaigning to stop vaping.

And from what I’ve read, cigarettes are much more dangerous than valuing. How we could ban vaping and not cigarettes is beyond me

Do you not think cigarettes are dangerous? Let’s compare cigarette related deaths with gun deaths. Why are the dems pushing for a cigarette ban?

I know why the republicans aren’t and I disagree with them. But why aren’t the dems? They are supposed to be the party concerned only about the health and safety of citizens.

Vaping deaths come on suddenly and with very little warning. I started this thread to showcase Trump's hypocrisy. He was all for banning it until he realized he'd lose votes. 

Show me where the Dems said they would ban cigarettes and then backtracked because they might lose votes. At least the Dems are for universal healthcare, so people could get treatment for smoking-related illnesses.

[tskeeter]

Nov 18, 2019 21:31:01 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Nov 18, 2019 18:57:47 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

We all know that cigarettes cause lung cancer.  Why haven't the democrats banned cigarettes?  I actually think both should be banned, btw.  

How can the Dems ban cigarettes? They’ve passed all kinds of bills that Moscow Mitch is just sitting on.
Of course, the Dems don’t have executive power - the guy who does hasn’t acted on cigarettes.

I do agree that both should be banned as a health hazard.

Seems to me that a relatively short time ago, Democrats resided in the White House and controlled both the House and the Senate.  Wouldn’t that have been an ideal time for Democrats to demonstrate their leadership and concern for the voters by banning cigarettes? If they had wanted to.

[alabamagal]

Maybe e-cigaettes (nicotine vaping) are not the problem.  Recent information that came out from the CDC indicates that most "vaping deaths" are linked to use of vaping illegal street THC products.  84% of the deaths were linked to THC products.  The data from the CDC continues to point toward THC vaping.  THC vaping is illegal

More research is needed on use of legal nicotine e-cigarettes.  They are likely a safer alternative to cigarettes and can be used to quit cigarette smoking.  

www.cnn.com/2019/10/28/health/cdc-vaping-death-data-mmwr/index.html

[Tennesseer]

Nov 19, 2019 2:32:55 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:31:01 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

How can the Dems ban cigarettes? They’ve passed all kinds of bills that Moscow Mitch is just sitting on.
Of course, the Dems don’t have executive power - the guy who does hasn’t acted on cigarettes.

I do agree that both should be banned as a health hazard.

Seems to me that a relatively short time ago, Democrats resided in the White House and controlled both the House and the Senate.  Wouldn’t that have been an ideal time for Democrats to demonstrate their leadership and concern for the voters by banning cigarettes? If they had wanted to.

Congress cannot outright ban smoking tobacco in any shape or form. Anyone remember the 18th and 21st Amendments to the U.S. Constitution? At best Congress can only propose the banning. After that it is up to the individual states.

[hoops902]

So someone is surprised that a politician had a thought (ban this), found out that the people they represent do not support that idea, and then changed their mind?  Isn't that precisely what we WANT politicians to do?  

[hoops902]

Nov 18, 2019 22:22:04 GMT -5 weltschmerz said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:50:16 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

And from what I’ve read, cigarettes are much more dangerous than valuing. How we could ban vaping and not cigarettes is beyond me

Do you not think cigarettes are dangerous? Let’s compare cigarette related deaths with gun deaths. Why are the dems pushing for a cigarette ban?

I know why the republicans aren’t and I disagree with them. But why aren’t the dems? They are supposed to be the party concerned only about the health and safety of citizens.

Vaping deaths come on suddenly and with very little warning. I started this thread to showcase Trump's hypocrisy. He was all for banning it until he realized he'd lose votes. 

Show me where the Dems said they would ban cigarettes and then backtracked because they might lose votes. At least the Dems are for universal healthcare, so people could get treatment for smoking-related illnesses.

But isn't this precisely what you WANT politicians doing who represent you?  They might feel/think a certain way, and then when they find out the people they represent disagree, they follow what the people want rather than what their own personal feeling is?  

Dems are for universal healthcare because that's what their constituents want.  If all of a sudden their constituents said "we don't want that" I'd completely expect them to reverse course...as they should.

Would you prefer politicians who said "I don't care what the people want, I'm doing it anyways"?  

There's enough to go after Trump on...is listening to his constituents and doing what they want him to do a negative though?  To me this is like one of the best political stories you could post to paint someone in a positive light.  Politician changes his mind on legislation after realizing his constituents disagree with his position...that's basically the perfect example of how it SHOULD work.

[tskeeter]

Nov 19, 2019 8:16:45 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Nov 19, 2019 2:32:55 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

Seems to me that a relatively short time ago, Democrats resided in the White House and controlled both the House and the Senate.  Wouldn’t that have been an ideal time for Democrats to demonstrate their leadership and concern for the voters by banning cigarettes? If they had wanted to.

Congress cannot outright ban smoking tobacco in any shape or form. Anyone remember the 18th and 21st Amendments to the U.S. Constitution? At best Congress can only propose the banning. After that it is up to the individual states.

Apparently I was a bit to indirect in making my point.  It wasn’t about smoking.  My point was that if the Democrats wanted to take action on any topic, they had the ideal opportunity.  The fact that they took no action demonstrates that the Democrats really didn’t want to address the issue.

In the spirit of there is more than one way to skin a cat, I suspect that the Federal government could ban smoking.  All you have to do is declare that tobacco is a pharmaceutical product.  After all, tobacco use generates all kinds of physiological responses, just like other drugs.  Under the control of the FDA, access to tobacco could be at the discretion of your Doc.  And how many Docs do you think would actually prescribe tobacco use for their patients?

[djAdvocate]

Nov 19, 2019 12:16:14 GMT -5 tskeeter said:

Nov 19, 2019 8:16:45 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Congress cannot outright ban smoking tobacco in any shape or form. Anyone remember the 18th and 21st Amendments to the U.S. Constitution? At best Congress can only propose the banning. After that it is up to the individual states.

Apparently I was a bit to indirect in making my point.  It wasn’t about smoking.  My point was that if the Democrats wanted to take action on any topic, they had the ideal opportunity.  The fact that they took no action demonstrates that the Democrats really didn’t want to address the issue.

In the spirit of there is more than one way to skin a cat, I suspect that the Federal government could ban smoking.  All you have to do is declare that tobacco is a pharmaceutical product.  After all, tobacco use generates all kinds of physiological responses, just like other drugs.  Under the control of the FDA, access to tobacco could be at the discretion of your Doc.  And how many Docs do you think would actually prescribe tobacco use for their patients?

I don't think that conclusion can be drawn.  it could also mean that they are in the pocket of tobacco companies, or that their constituents don't want them to address the issue, and they set their own preferences aside.

that happens in politics.

[justme]

Nov 19, 2019 6:09:20 GMT -5 alabamagal said:

Maybe e-cigaettes (nicotine vaping) are not the problem.  Recent information that came out from the CDC indicates that most "vaping deaths" are linked to use of vaping illegal street THC products.  84% of the deaths were linked to THC products.  The data from the CDC continues to point toward THC vaping.  THC vaping is illegal

More research is needed on use of legal nicotine e-cigarettes.  They are likely a safer alternative to cigarettes and can be used to quit cigarette smoking.  

www.cnn.com/2019/10/28/health/cdc-vaping-death-data-mmwr/index.html

It's not illegal everywhere. In states where pot is legal you can get a legal THC vape. The problem is 

SPOILER: Click to show

making shit illegal when people are going to do it anyways!

[steff]

Anyone ever heard of the Tobacco lobby?  Anyone who thinks that EITHER party can just ban cigarettes in a simple quick procedure is uninformed & naive. 

[steff]

Nov 19, 2019 12:21:34 GMT -5 justme said:

Nov 19, 2019 6:09:20 GMT -5 alabamagal said:

Maybe e-cigaettes (nicotine vaping) are not the problem.  Recent information that came out from the CDC indicates that most "vaping deaths" are linked to use of vaping illegal street THC products.  84% of the deaths were linked to THC products.  The data from the CDC continues to point toward THC vaping.  THC vaping is illegal

More research is needed on use of legal nicotine e-cigarettes.  They are likely a safer alternative to cigarettes and can be used to quit cigarette smoking.  

www.cnn.com/2019/10/28/health/cdc-vaping-death-data-mmwr/index.html

It's not illegal everywhere. In states where pot is legal you can get a legal THC vape. The problem is 

SPOILER: Click to show

making shit illegal when people are going to do it anyways!

THC vapes are not legal in my state, but I get them.  We did a LOT of research so I know how to spot a fake.  I've only run across 1 set that was fake & when it was pointed out, our guy pulled them & didn't sell them. 

[spartyparty]

Nov 18, 2019 21:50:16 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:41:08 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

The guy in the White House for three years was all for putting restrictions on vaping products until he found out he would lose votes in the 2020 elections because vaping businesses would close.

Meanwhile, the guy in the White House for three year's wife is campaigning to stop vaping.

And from what I’ve read, cigarettes are much more dangerous than valuing. How we could ban vaping and not cigarettes is beyond me

Do you not think cigarettes are dangerous? Let’s compare cigarette related deaths with gun deaths. Why are the dems pushing for a cigarette ban?

I know why the republicans aren’t and I disagree with them. But why aren’t the dems? They are supposed to be the party concerned only about the health and safety of citizens.

Well they have taxed the crap out them...which does help to discourage tobacco usage.

[OldCoyote]

Nov 18, 2019 21:31:01 GMT -5 Gardening Grandma said:

Nov 18, 2019 18:57:47 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

We all know that cigarettes cause lung cancer.  Why haven't the democrats banned cigarettes?  I actually think both should be banned, btw.  

How can the Dems ban cigarettes? They’ve passed all kinds of bills that Moscow Mitch is just sitting on.
Of course, the Dems don’t have executive power - the guy who does hasn’t acted on cigarettes.

I do agree that both should be banned as a health hazard.

Democrat have introduced a bill to ban cigarettes??

[OldCoyote]

Nov 19, 2019 12:41:27 GMT -5 spartyparty said:

Nov 18, 2019 21:50:16 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

And from what I’ve read, cigarettes are much more dangerous than valuing. How we could ban vaping and not cigarettes is beyond me

Do you not think cigarettes are dangerous? Let’s compare cigarette related deaths with gun deaths. Why are the dems pushing for a cigarette ban?

I know why the republicans aren’t and I disagree with them. But why aren’t the dems? They are supposed to be the party concerned only about the health and safety of citizens.

Well they have taxed the crap out them...which does help to discourage tobacco usage.

I think a pack of cigarettes is like $10 now!

[steff]

pack of cigarettes in GA run from $4.50 to $5.75 depending on where you go.  Carton of Marlboro run $50-60. 

[sesfw]

I suspect that the Federal government could ban smoking. All you have to do is declare that tobacco is a pharmaceutical product. 


At one time tobacco growers received a subsidy to grow tobacco.  Don't know if they still do.  The family of DH#2 DW#1 grew tobacco in Ohio when she was a child.

DH#1 was a heavy smoker and that is what contributed to his early death.  Just stop the subsidy and MAYBE the price would get so high just the rich and stupid would smoke.  Don't know the price of vaping but what a stupid way to spend hard earned cash.

I remember as a child (early 1950s) my mother said when the price got to be $1 a carton, she would quit.  HA!

She smoked until 5 years before her death (2001), and spent the last 5 years attached to an oxygen tank.