newsobserver.com projects - FDA - Comments

Re: Troxler: smoke 'em out

jonoflocke — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:14:34 -0400

I wonder if "conservative people" could at least craft a more consistent approach to tobacco regulation than the current regime.

Re: Troxler: smoke 'em out

beachbum3 — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 14:59:02 -0400

If mr.troxler considers the spending an tax breaks to the top salary earners in this country an the deregulations that have been imposed under the past eight years of the former BUSH adminstration as being conservative then i have got a bridge to sell to him for if he truely thinks that was conservatism the he truely doesn't have the vague idea of what conservatism realy is . in my opinion it is when the politicians in this country take care of an spend the taxpayers intrusted funds in a responsibly way an not with no bid war contracts an all kind of other giveway contracts that contractor produce sub standard products an get paid for top of the line quality thank you from a democarts

Re: Troxler: smoke 'em out

riverrd — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:55:28 -0400

Yea, that's right! Elect "conservative" people and there will not be any regulations on anything you eat, drink or breathe. Just goes to show that the Flat-Earth repoblicans want YOU TO DIE!!!

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:50:03 -0400

Never said I had a wife - was clarifying the tax increase PINHEAD

Ah, so this lie was just clarifying stuff, you know about how the tax increase would impact your couple owned $200,000 a year business, and your multiple employees.

Gosh, guess I am just a PINHEAD.

you are wrong and you must resort to personal attacks

Giggle.

The only "typical liberal move" here is holding you accountable for your BS.

Reality has a liberal bias. You should consider getting a passport and visiting sometime.

-PINHEAD

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

CitizenOpinionated — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:40:54 -0400

Never said I had a wife - was clarifying the tax increase PINHEAD - no wife but continue to avoid the fact that you are wrong and you must resort to personal attacks...typical liberal move.

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:40:14 -0400

Again - avoiding the question again...

Yes you are.

Hate to keep you from your wife and $200,000 plus small business on this fine day.

Do come back when you have a minute and a point about Senator Burr's ineffectiveness and lack of independence.

As for SCHIP, which this thread is not about, the program was designed with the intent to cover uninsured children in families with incomes that are modest but too high to qualify for Medicaid. Many Republicans have supported it over the years. I guess they like middle class votes as well as the next guy.

The point remains, Burr championed a bill for NC he couldn't even get Republicans to vote for when it didn't even matter. Hagan crossed the aisle to do what's right for NC.

I've praised Burr plenty for this one. You should praise Hagan too.

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

CitizenOpinionated — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:22:13 -0400

Again - avoiding the question again...

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 11:08:37 -0400

Question - Why are we insuring these children if there parents can provide the health care for them?

Their.

Are you quite sure you are a married couple, and small business owner earning over $200,000 and employing multiple people?

Citizen...

Have you even had a date?

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

CitizenOpinionated — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:41:29 -0400

Question - Why are we insuring these children if there parents can provide the health care for them?

Question 2 - Do you believe that government control is better than personal choice?

In my opinion, if Hagan was so concerned with the tobacco industry she would not have voted for S-CHIP. She merely added her name in order to appease her donor base and save political face, hence we she did not really do more than add her name to it...

at least Burr has been consistent concerning this defense of the tobacco industry

Again SCHIP did nothing more that mandate insurance for children whose parents were already paying for it - simply put - government inciting control over personal choice...

But then again, since you smoke and you love government control and probably government health care - you might want to consider some lifestyle changes - rationed health care could prove to be a pain if smoking lead some unfortunate disease given you consider it a luxury item...

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:30:56 -0400

Response to what?

You hate SCHIP. That makes it remotely like the FDA proposal because...

You hate that too?

I agree with Senators Burr and Hagan that the FDA has no business regulating tobacco.

I also agree with Senator Hagan that the benefits of SCHIP outweigh the costs to the consumer, namely myself as a smoker.

You may disagree with SCHIP, as Burr does, but it still doesn't have squat to do with Hagan being an independent voice on the FDA bill.

If by your logic, she only voted with Burr, as the ONLY Democrat to do so "because of tobacco donors," then why did she back SCHIP?

You call independence "confusing." I call it refreshing.

Hagan's already proven herself way more independent a representative in months than Burr has in years of just doing what Bush and Rove told him to do. I hope she rubs off on him. For his sake and our own.

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

CitizenOpinionated — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:20:32 -0400

I realized the typo - but then again I would like to see your response...but then again I doubt you can conjure up one when the facts speak louder than you mindless rhetoric

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:15:05 -0400

Thus the relation is their you PINHEAD

There.

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

CitizenOpinionated — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 10:09:01 -0400

Gosh have you actually read the S-CHIP bill?

The purpose of the bill is "to provide dependable and stable funding for children's health insurance under titles XXI and XIX of the Social Security Act in order to enroll all six million uninsured children who are eligible, but not enrolled, for coverage today through such titles."

The children are not enrolled because their parents can afford to pay for the health care out of their own pocket...

All you are doing is continuing to perpetrate the "emotional" argument that children do not have healthcare...blah blah blah, when in reality the bill only aims to "enroll ALL six million uninsured children who are eligible, BUT NOT enrolled."

Again, because their parents can AFFORD to pay without relying on the government.

Thus the relation is their you PINHEAD

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:47:02 -0400

Richard is the one that tirelessly worked to get this bill passed.

Yet didn't.

Re: Hagan announces tobacco vote

Gosh — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:44:32 -0400

Hagan voted for S-CHIP
Hagan voted for the tobacco amendment
Confused?

Again, no. And it doesn't matter how many more times you ask the question.

There's no contradiction.

Taxing a luxury item to insure millions more children has nothing to do with creating more FDA bureaucracy.