*
*
Home
Help
Search
Login
Register
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Apr 19, 2014, 06:07:51 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search: Advanced search
657247 Posts in 9253 Topics by 3396 Members Latest Member: - vlozan86 Most online today: 81 - most online ever: 494 (Jul 01, 2007, 02:59:53 PM)
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 20
Print
Author Topic: The Consolidated "Slate Is Stupid" Thread  (Read 30443 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #225 on: Sep 26, 2009, 01:20:58 PM »

Nog you are seriously missing the silver-lining here.  Becoming a clove cigarette bootlegger would totally get you written up in the Sunday NYT
Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user

Posts: 39426


« Reply #226 on: Sep 26, 2009, 01:21:57 PM »

I don't know that I really have a problem with a tax on soda and, you know, twinkies and shit. Tax them just like cigarettes. Whatever.

But I agree with Greg that banning smoking outdoors in a public park is fucking ridiculous. Complaints about littering butts would make perfect sense to me, but the actual smoke itself? You're outside. It's no big deal.

Finally, I agree with blucas that the article is horribly written and takes a very condescending attitude towards people with actual liberal values. That's true regardless of how many of the points in the article that I agree with.
Logged

I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #227 on: Sep 26, 2009, 01:25:25 PM »

I think it should be allowed if they put paper bags over their cigarettes
Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
diesel_powered
Registered user

Posts: 19210


« Reply #228 on: Sep 26, 2009, 02:01:56 PM »

I believe California has banned smoking in public parks (which extends to public beaches).
Logged

Quote
she had me at "let's make a sandwich"
jebreject
Registered user

Posts: 27071


« Reply #229 on: Sep 26, 2009, 05:23:49 PM »

I got into a discussion about this stuff last night with my friend Matt and my opinion basically boils down to who gives a shit. Though he seemed to be using these cigarette bans as examples of creeping authoritarianism.
Logged

I'm not racist, I've got lots of black Facebook friends.
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user

Posts: 39426


« Reply #230 on: Sep 26, 2009, 08:57:26 PM »

I definitely support most cigarette bans, but the idea to me of banning them in a large open area seems over the top.
Logged

I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
jebreject
Registered user

Posts: 27071


« Reply #231 on: Sep 26, 2009, 10:25:38 PM »

No, I'm with you on that, and I think banning menthols would be ridiculous as well. But I mean, it seems such a silly thing to get all that up in arms about. I mean, we have far bigger fish to fry than this bullshit.

Then again, first they took away my cigarettes, then they took away my ......
Logged

I'm not racist, I've got lots of black Facebook friends.
diesel_powered
Registered user

Posts: 19210


« Reply #232 on: Sep 26, 2009, 11:15:42 PM »

I'm kind of ambivalent on the whole thing. I'm for indoor bans partially as a labor issue and partially as as a selfish comfort issue as far as bars and venues go. And smoking bans do make it much easier to quit. On the other hand, I don't like the whole nanny-state thing that cigarette bans and food bans and proposed soda bans seem to be promoting. Ultimately, it's your choice to start smoking and thinking of the children is no excuse to treat everyone like children. I guess what worries me most about the whole thing is the fact that not only do we have bigger fish to fry, but I'm also afraid that this is wasting political capital by giving those who worry about this sort of thing more things to be up in arms about. How soon will it be before people start coming out with "SEE! SEE! THEY'RE TAKING AWAY CIGARETTES! THIS IS JUST WHAT SOCIALIST HEALTHCARE WANTS! CIGARETTES TODAY, DEATH PANELS TOMORROW!!!"? The whole thing strikes me as an awkward move politically that's eventually going to come around and bite people in the ass. As far as banning or taxing foods go, remind me again why we couldn't simply change regulations to support a healthier lifestyle? Maybe, say, ban commercial chains in public schools and/or or regulate advertising? Or how about working on subsidies to encourage penetration of healthy alternatives into areas where there aren't any?
Logged

Quote
she had me at "let's make a sandwich"
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #233 on: Sep 26, 2009, 11:48:47 PM »

Ugh.  You guys are having the exact conversation Saletan wants you to have.  No one gives a fuck about sugar.  The healthcare debate is not about sugar.  Not even Sarah Palin and Andrew Breitbart are retarded enough to think that the health care debate is about sugar, or that the conversation will shift to sugar.  Some studies came out.  As a result, some people want action taken.  This happens like twice a year, and sugar is still plentiful!  Smoking bans are a horse of a different color.  Saletan fucking knows he's being disingenuous in using the comparison.  He just wants to make his lame fucking puns and assert his intellectual superiority over Kos diarists. 
Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
Greg Nog
Registered user

Posts: 21629


« Reply #234 on: Sep 29, 2009, 03:52:19 PM »

No.  Not enough people give a fuck about sugar at present to make Saletan's poorly-written article prophetic, but that doesn't mean it won't happen; the recent NYC ban on trans fats did, in fact, happen.

Most of us are also able to discuss such things without getting the vapors over whether the Evil Saletan has placed thoughts in our heads.

EDIT: whoops I accidentally linked to a site that sells wallets, my bad
« Last Edit: Sep 29, 2009, 03:54:49 PM by Greg Nog » Logged
what whale
Registered user

Posts: 362


« Reply #235 on: Sep 29, 2009, 03:56:55 PM »

I believe California has banned smoking in public parks (which extends to public beaches).

My alma mater has gone overboard on this issue as well.  Totally fucking nuts. 

IN THE PARKING LOTS
« Last Edit: Sep 29, 2009, 03:58:37 PM by what whale » Logged

Quote from: "Hooks"
sick of bein sad but thank beer companies make everyday better lol
Ignatius
Registered user

Posts: 7082


« Reply #236 on: Sep 29, 2009, 04:18:54 PM »

They put through a similar policy at a school I used to attend. It didn't really work. You have to take into account that a school, particularly of UB's size, has a great deal of workers in addition to the students who couldn't give a shit whether or not there's a smoking ban. It's very difficult to enforce. But then, that article says that although smoking will be banned on all grounds and buildings, but “a punitive approach to smoking was not the right way to go.” To me, a successful outright ban and a non-punitive approach are mutually exclusive.
Logged
diesel_powered
Registered user

Posts: 19210


« Reply #237 on: Sep 29, 2009, 04:22:17 PM »

Especially when a certain portion of the population considers a smoking ban a blanket endorsement of being assholes to smokers.
Logged

Quote
she had me at "let's make a sandwich"
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #238 on: Sep 29, 2009, 05:02:54 PM »

No.  Not enough people give a fuck about sugar at present to make Saletan's poorly-written article prophetic, but that doesn't mean it won't happen; the recent NYC ban on trans fats did, in fact, happen.

Most of us are also able to discuss such things without getting the vapors over whether the Evil Saletan has placed thoughts in our heads.

EDIT: whoops I accidentally linked to a site that sells wallets, my bad

I mean, you don't see how stupid this is?  "How come no one in the healthcare debate is mentioning the GROWING AMBITIONS of the food police?  This is a secret, important story of government encroachment that the liberal media is IGNORING."

It's borderline Beckian. 

I'm not sure how the trans fats ban relates, since that's something that only has an effect on producers and not consumers (well, maybe in terms of small price increases, but not in terms of limiting behavior).  That would be more comparable to a ban on high fructose corn syrup.  Which I might actually support, depending on the details. 
Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
Greg Nog
Registered user

Posts: 21629


« Reply #239 on: Sep 29, 2009, 05:28:33 PM »

"How come no one in the healthcare debate is mentioning the GROWING AMBITIONS of the food police?  This is a secret, important story of government encroachment that the liberal media is IGNORING."

It's borderline Beckian. 

it's pretty fun to make up passages and then rail against them
Logged
Greg Nog
Registered user

Posts: 21629


« Reply #240 on: Sep 29, 2009, 05:32:20 PM »

the part where Saletan said "Anyone who stands against Slate in the coming rebellion will be mowed down LIKE DOGS IN THE STREETS" was chilling in its Orwellian intensity
Logged
Anne the Man
Registered user

Posts: 4444


« Reply #241 on: Oct 04, 2009, 07:26:59 PM »

They put through a similar policy at a school I used to attend. It didn't really work. You have to take into account that a school, particularly of UB's size, has a great deal of workers in addition to the students who couldn't give a shit whether or not there's a smoking ban. It's very difficult to enforce. But then, that article says that although smoking will be banned on all grounds and buildings, but “a punitive approach to smoking was not the right way to go.” To me, a successful outright ban and a non-punitive approach are mutually exclusive.

If they banned the tobacco industry rather'n the smokers it could work, but that won't happen for ten million years.

When it comes to smoking bans, cries of nanny-statery are stupid. Especially since a lot of the people making those cries don't have a problem with bans on cocaine and heroin etc.
Logged

Hey jerks, mind if I watch you jerks do your jerk-bending?
donblood
Guest
« Reply #242 on: Oct 04, 2009, 07:41:25 PM »

When it comes to smoking bans, cries of nanny-statery are stupid. Especially since a lot of the people making those cries don't have a problem with bans on cocaine and heroin etc.

You sorta can't compare the two, since one is legal and highly regulated, while the others are illegal and so give rise to everything from petty theft to highly organized crime.
Logged
Andrew_TSKS
Registered user

Posts: 39426


« Reply #243 on: Oct 04, 2009, 07:53:15 PM »

Ah, but if they WERE legal and highly regulated, rather than banned as they are now, those problems wouldn't exist. So you kinda can compare the two.
Logged

I just want to be myself and I want you to love me for who I am.
Anne the Man
Registered user

Posts: 4444


« Reply #244 on: Oct 04, 2009, 08:00:10 PM »

That's my point. If cigarettes were introduced on the market now they'd be banned in a flash, no question. It's only because they've been around for ages and are integrated into our culture that they're not.
Logged

Hey jerks, mind if I watch you jerks do your jerk-bending?
jess
Registered user

Posts: 3571


« Reply #245 on: Oct 04, 2009, 08:05:57 PM »

My school is also instituting a campus-wide smoking ban (on the grounds entirely) starting in November I think, and I believe smokers can be ticketed after that. We're unsure of the extent to which it will actually be enforced, but it will be interesting to see how it goes. A bunch of us in the department were debating (mostly joking, but kind of not, because it is a good idea) if we had time to get a study passed by the IRB and up and running to see what affect (if any) it has on smoking rates in students.
Logged
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #246 on: Oct 04, 2009, 09:57:46 PM »

I seriously would not be able to hang with that. I really relished my smoke breaks while in class. Plus that's how I met more than half my friends at college.
Logged

think 'on the road.'
diesel_powered
Registered user

Posts: 19210


« Reply #247 on: Oct 04, 2009, 10:05:09 PM »

Ahh yes, college... where everything was one cigarette away.
Logged

Quote
she had me at "let's make a sandwich"
dieblucasdie
Registered user

Posts: 24493


« Reply #248 on: Feb 07, 2010, 05:30:17 PM »

http://www.slate.com/id/2243797/

Quote
Down With the People
Blame the childish, ignorant American public—not politicians—for our political and economic crisis.

Quote
I don't mean to suggest that honesty is what separates the two parties. Increasingly, the crucial distinction is between the minority of serious politicians in either party who are prepared to speak directly about our choices, on the one hand, and the majority who indulge the public's delusions, on the other.

Guess when talk-radio assholes talk about "liberal elitists" we can't claim it's a strawman anymore

Logged

he was basically your only chance at making the world love you.
elpollodiablo
Registered user

Posts: 32624


« Reply #249 on: Feb 07, 2010, 06:58:39 PM »

Hearing David Plotz and Emily Bazelon argue is just about enough to make me want to go join a Tea Party rally. Provided there are pitchforks and the will to use them.

Seriously that whole pack at Slate (excepting Dana Stevens) are the very epitome of the privileged, over-educated, insufferable yuppie liberal. Plotz and Bazelon are now my go-to mental placeholders for sneering Ivy League cunts.

Pardon my use of the c-word, plz
Logged

think 'on the road.'
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 20
Print
LPTJ | Last Plane Forums | Departure Lounge | Topic: The Consolidated "Slate Is Stupid" Thread
Jump to:  

Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines
Board layout based on the Oxygen design by Bloc