posted on April 25, 2001 10:56:48 PM
The Tobacco Industry has received the right signals from the Bush Administration to go ahead and get agressive and the first battlefield is tearing down the deal made with the Clinton Administration that gets rid of cigarette advertising anywhere around schoolyards. The signals consist of the gutting of the funds used by the Justice Department to persue the Tabacco Industry, Bush's "Coming Out" as Pro-Industry and Anti-American citizen concerns, and the Supreme Court Justices who showed that they are ready to back up the Tabacco Industry to the hilt (as evidenced from this last presidential election)!
"We've got truthful speech here. This is a restriction that singles out tobacco advertising. It is discriminatory in that way," Berlind (Tobacco Spokesperson) said.
"Justice Department officials confirmed that the tobacco litigation team had sent an internal memo to the deputy attorney general's office last month, saying the lawsuit may have to be abandoned if it is not adequately funded."
posted on April 26, 2001 12:42:17 AM
Cigarettes are still legal right? Then who cares if and how they advertise? Everybody knows they are bad for you, if you still smoke, then its an informed decision. I think it's unfair to go after these legitimate companies for selling a legitimate product. I'm sorry, but if a kid is on the fence about whether or not to start the new habit, a billboard isn't going to push them either way. If it does, then there are deeper issues involved than their potential early death 30 -50 years from now, from lung cancer. I've never smoked a day in my life, I guess all those Joe Camel ads didn't do much for me.
posted on April 26, 2001 04:06:57 AM
Yes I was already not part of the social set in school so I did not need to suck down those vial things to prove I was a loyal pack member.
posted on April 26, 2001 01:51:28 PM
Yah, those second-graders were a bit stupid to be smoking those cigarettes: a third of them must have been killed by them at this rate. Of course, if someone was marketing Rat Poison as a drink to your kids, I'm sure you'd feel the same way.
posted on April 26, 2001 01:55:02 PM
I could be wrong, jlpiece, but judging from your posts I've seen is it a stretch to think that you'd have a problem with a porno film company -- a legitimate business selling a legitimate product -- posting ads near schools?
posted on April 26, 2001 09:11:08 PM
I think you've hit it right on the head, James. Seems that to Republicans, the ONLY morality is making money! If it makes money, then that's who you side with and to the Devil with human beings and the suffering that gets caused by it. And since the pornogrphy industry is legal, then they must support having adult video stores right next to school yards.
Heck, why stop there?
Since its all the rage nowadays to victimize our kids with advertising blatantly right in school, and according to these fine, upstanding citizens who support Tobacco's right to advertise, I expect to see them rooting for Hustler Magazine advertisments being put on lunch boxes and school lockers and even Larry Flynt's special: Barely Legal Magazine depicting nude 18 year old women that look like minors.
posted on April 26, 2001 11:19:26 PM
Of course not, because then there is the concern of pedophiles and sexual perversion being introduced to children. Thats a little more serious than a picture of Joe Camel. Anyone that doesn't see that is a bit off. There is no correlation between tobacco advertising and pedophilia, or any other sexual deviances that I am aware of. Perhaps I'm the only one that sees the difference between an ad trying to sell tobacco, and a hangout for child molesters and sexual deviants being near a school. How about I take my chances with a picture of the marlboro man near my kids school, and you can have the pedophiles. How logical does that correlation seem to you now that you have thought about it? Not very, I hope, for your sake and your kids.
BTW - anyone that thinks I'm a republican must not be very adept with the reading skills. However, I love the constant attempts to categorize those with differing opinions. Shows a lot of insight.
posted on April 27, 2001 08:36:14 AMborillar stated I think you've hit it right on the head, James. Seems that to Republicans, the ONLY morality is making money!
In response to your comment of:
I could be wrong, jlpiece, but judging from your posts I've seen is it a stretch to think that you'd have a problem with a porno film company -- a legitimate business selling a legitimate product -- posting ads near schools?
posted on April 27, 2001 08:53:47 AM
I'm going to tred on the Community Guidelines here and say to jlpiece that I think that he has one hell of an ego! As if everything that I write is geared towards him or is in some way related to something that he says. Sheese!
posted on April 27, 2001 08:59:10 AM
I should have said "BTW - anyone that thinks I'm a[n athiest] must not be very adept with the reading skills. However, I love the constant attempts to categorize those with differing opinions. Shows a lot of insight" when jlpiece decided I was an atheist a little while ago.
