IPOD
RADIO
So I didn't mention anything about this before the election, because I was on the fence about it, and I didn't want to unduly influence anyone to vote a certain way when I wasn't sure that I was completely comfortable with my own position. But I voted against Measure 50, which would have modified the Oregon constitution to add about $0.80 in taxes to each pack of cigarettes sold in the state. The proceeds were to be spent on the Children's Health Fund, to expand medical coverage to Oregon kids who didn't have it and whose families couldn't afford it.
I wasn't even going to write about it, until I read this story this morning, in which supporters of the measure blamed its defeat on an advertising blitz paid for by tobacco companies. And that pissed me off, because it makes it sound as if those of us who voted against the measure (and it seems like there were a lot of us) are just ignorant tools of Big Tobacco.
For the record, I hate smoking. I smoked a pack and a half a day for seven years and quit cold turkey four and a half years ago. The closest I've come to having a cigarette since then was when I accidentally took a swig out of a beer bottle that my brother had been using as an ashtray, which was as unpleasant as it sounds. Now that I've got a sense of smell again, I hate leaving a bar or club at the end of the night and smelling like a chimney, and if I have my druthers, I'll choose to go to night spots where smoking is not allowed (although I don't believe in legislating this, but that's another rant for another day). The vast majority of my friends are not smokers, and I wish that the ones that still do smoke would wake up tomorrow and never take another drag again. And finally, I believe that the tobacco companies are drug pushers and cancer merchants who murdered their most loyal customers by misleading entire generations of smokers into believing that the health risks associated with smoking were insignificant.
Hopefully my non-smoker credentials are in order now. So why do I side with Big Tobacco over poor sick kids?
Well, I don't. I side with smokers, because I used to be one. And from a smoker's perspective, anti-smoking rhetoric is shrill, condescending, often poorly-informed and occasionally downright hostile. It's practically fundamentalist. There's no room for argument or questioning the science behind their conclusions, because to do so means that you are pro-cancer and a dupe of Big Tobacco. It's as if everyone with pink lungs and a big mouth thinks that smoking is the sole reason that humans don't live forever. In today's society, there are basically three groups of people that it's okay to talk shit about: fat people, Nazis and smokers. And the fat people are forming advocacy groups.
This whole measure was conceptually flawed and relied on emotional rather than rational arguments. It played upon the existing dislike of smoking (and, by extension, smokers) by saying that we can take care of sick kids by taxing something that you already don't like. All you have to do is take money away from filthy smokers, and we can have healthy children! It's a double feel-good!
Well, here's the thing: smokers are addicts, and a lot of them tend to be found on the lower end of the income scale. What good is expanding health care for poor kids if their single mother--who's just barely not getting by as it is--now has to come up with an additional $40 a month for her habit? And please don't use the excuse that higher-priced cigarettes will convince smokers to quit. That's the sort of logic that non-addicts come up with. Addiction isn't logical. When you're in the grip of it, it's your top priority. You will do what it takes to feed it. You will not quit until you are ready to quit. I smoked for years when I couldn't afford it. I quit because I was ready to quit, and while it was nice to have the extra money in my pocket, it wasn't the reason I did it. I don't know anyone who quit smoking for purely financial reasons. My brother claims to have done just that, but I think the fact that he quit right about the time he started living with a non-smoker who would play with his weenie had just as much, if not more, to do with it.
And even if the price of cigarettes did affect their consumption, financially punishing a specific class of people for their lifestyle choices is insulting and should be recognized for the bigotry that it is. Everyone has vices that reduce their quality of life. Unless you slavishly adhere to a healthy and balanced diet, avoid alcohol and trans fats, regularly exercise, eschew a stressful career and lifestyle, avoid a sedentary life, don't engage in activities that carry a disproportionate risk of injury and abstain from sex (which always carries some risk of STD transmission, no matter how you do it), please don't try to force other people to lead a healthier life. Of course, you can always make the innocent-victim-of-second-hand-smoke argument, but there's plenty of evidence to suggest that the dangers of second-hand smoke to healthy adults are dramatically overstated.
Finally, although I'm sure that some kids who would have qualified for this expanded health care would have needed it because White Trash Mom and Deadbeat Dad insist on smoking two packs a day inside their double-wide with all of the windows closed, cigarette smoke is not the only reason that kids get sick and need health care! Childhood obesity is supposed to be an epidemic, so why didn't this measure include a tax on potato chips and McDonald's? I might work in the video game industry, but I'll be the first to admit that it's not the healthiest thing in the world for a kid to sit on his ass for five hours a day playing video games, so how about a $10 surcharge for every video game sold in Oregon? There's ample evidence that a vegan diet can be extremely unhealthy for children. How about a tax on all foods that aren't meat or animal-derived? (If this is too broad, we can just tax patchouli oil and hacky sacks, or start kicking hippies in the nuts so they can't reproduce.)
Here's the reason why: because the Oregon legislators who pushed for this bill know that nicotine is one of the most powerfully addictive drugs in the world. They don't want to stop Big Tobacco from pushing drugs, they're just the pimps who want a cut of the profits. I'm glad that this bill went down in flames, and I hope that the Legislature finds a fairer and more reasonable way to extend health care to those who need it most.
I wasn't even going to write about it, until I read this story this morning, in which supporters of the measure blamed its defeat on an advertising blitz paid for by tobacco companies. And that pissed me off, because it makes it sound as if those of us who voted against the measure (and it seems like there were a lot of us) are just ignorant tools of Big Tobacco.
For the record, I hate smoking. I smoked a pack and a half a day for seven years and quit cold turkey four and a half years ago. The closest I've come to having a cigarette since then was when I accidentally took a swig out of a beer bottle that my brother had been using as an ashtray, which was as unpleasant as it sounds. Now that I've got a sense of smell again, I hate leaving a bar or club at the end of the night and smelling like a chimney, and if I have my druthers, I'll choose to go to night spots where smoking is not allowed (although I don't believe in legislating this, but that's another rant for another day). The vast majority of my friends are not smokers, and I wish that the ones that still do smoke would wake up tomorrow and never take another drag again. And finally, I believe that the tobacco companies are drug pushers and cancer merchants who murdered their most loyal customers by misleading entire generations of smokers into believing that the health risks associated with smoking were insignificant.
Hopefully my non-smoker credentials are in order now. So why do I side with Big Tobacco over poor sick kids?
Well, I don't. I side with smokers, because I used to be one. And from a smoker's perspective, anti-smoking rhetoric is shrill, condescending, often poorly-informed and occasionally downright hostile. It's practically fundamentalist. There's no room for argument or questioning the science behind their conclusions, because to do so means that you are pro-cancer and a dupe of Big Tobacco. It's as if everyone with pink lungs and a big mouth thinks that smoking is the sole reason that humans don't live forever. In today's society, there are basically three groups of people that it's okay to talk shit about: fat people, Nazis and smokers. And the fat people are forming advocacy groups.
This whole measure was conceptually flawed and relied on emotional rather than rational arguments. It played upon the existing dislike of smoking (and, by extension, smokers) by saying that we can take care of sick kids by taxing something that you already don't like. All you have to do is take money away from filthy smokers, and we can have healthy children! It's a double feel-good!
Well, here's the thing: smokers are addicts, and a lot of them tend to be found on the lower end of the income scale. What good is expanding health care for poor kids if their single mother--who's just barely not getting by as it is--now has to come up with an additional $40 a month for her habit? And please don't use the excuse that higher-priced cigarettes will convince smokers to quit. That's the sort of logic that non-addicts come up with. Addiction isn't logical. When you're in the grip of it, it's your top priority. You will do what it takes to feed it. You will not quit until you are ready to quit. I smoked for years when I couldn't afford it. I quit because I was ready to quit, and while it was nice to have the extra money in my pocket, it wasn't the reason I did it. I don't know anyone who quit smoking for purely financial reasons. My brother claims to have done just that, but I think the fact that he quit right about the time he started living with a non-smoker who would play with his weenie had just as much, if not more, to do with it.
And even if the price of cigarettes did affect their consumption, financially punishing a specific class of people for their lifestyle choices is insulting and should be recognized for the bigotry that it is. Everyone has vices that reduce their quality of life. Unless you slavishly adhere to a healthy and balanced diet, avoid alcohol and trans fats, regularly exercise, eschew a stressful career and lifestyle, avoid a sedentary life, don't engage in activities that carry a disproportionate risk of injury and abstain from sex (which always carries some risk of STD transmission, no matter how you do it), please don't try to force other people to lead a healthier life. Of course, you can always make the innocent-victim-of-second-hand-smoke argument, but there's plenty of evidence to suggest that the dangers of second-hand smoke to healthy adults are dramatically overstated.
Finally, although I'm sure that some kids who would have qualified for this expanded health care would have needed it because White Trash Mom and Deadbeat Dad insist on smoking two packs a day inside their double-wide with all of the windows closed, cigarette smoke is not the only reason that kids get sick and need health care! Childhood obesity is supposed to be an epidemic, so why didn't this measure include a tax on potato chips and McDonald's? I might work in the video game industry, but I'll be the first to admit that it's not the healthiest thing in the world for a kid to sit on his ass for five hours a day playing video games, so how about a $10 surcharge for every video game sold in Oregon? There's ample evidence that a vegan diet can be extremely unhealthy for children. How about a tax on all foods that aren't meat or animal-derived? (If this is too broad, we can just tax patchouli oil and hacky sacks, or start kicking hippies in the nuts so they can't reproduce.)
Here's the reason why: because the Oregon legislators who pushed for this bill know that nicotine is one of the most powerfully addictive drugs in the world. They don't want to stop Big Tobacco from pushing drugs, they're just the pimps who want a cut of the profits. I'm glad that this bill went down in flames, and I hope that the Legislature finds a fairer and more reasonable way to extend health care to those who need it most.
The Colorado Rockies are attempting to trademark "Rocktober," because of the incredible winning streak that got them into the post-season and into the World Series. I expect that this filing will be contested by every crappy classic rock station, ever. In related news, sources close to the organization have confirmed that, despite how things have gone for them lately, they have no intentions of applying for a trademark for the term "Sucktastic."
Also (and this is going to get me in trouble with my churchgoing friends), I just found out that the Rockies are the first overtly Christian professional sports team. Now, I've got no problem with people believing in imaginary friends if that's what it takes to convince you that there are no monsters under your bed, but seriously, making your whole team Christian from the top down? That seems a little, I don't know, oppressive. Not to mention the fact that the Coors family, who own that delicious brewery that the Rox's stadium is named for, have a long history of the wrong kind of Christianity, specifically the extreme right-wing, race-hating, homophobic kind. So, just as the Red Sox victory over the Cleveland Indians was a victory over racism, so would a Rockies defeat be a blow against intolerance.
Or whatever. Go Sox!
Also (and this is going to get me in trouble with my churchgoing friends), I just found out that the Rockies are the first overtly Christian professional sports team. Now, I've got no problem with people believing in imaginary friends if that's what it takes to convince you that there are no monsters under your bed, but seriously, making your whole team Christian from the top down? That seems a little, I don't know, oppressive. Not to mention the fact that the Coors family, who own that delicious brewery that the Rox's stadium is named for, have a long history of the wrong kind of Christianity, specifically the extreme right-wing, race-hating, homophobic kind. So, just as the Red Sox victory over the Cleveland Indians was a victory over racism, so would a Rockies defeat be a blow against intolerance.
Or whatever. Go Sox!
This just in: Rudy Giuliani is rooting for the Red Sox. That's right. The former mayor of New York City, who keeps four Yankees World Series rings on his dresser, has pulled a reverse Johnny Damon and started cheering for a team whose World Series appearance should cause bile to rise to the back of his throat. This didn't play so well when Bill Richardson tried it either.
I assume that Yankees fandom is sort of like a parallel universe version of the Red Sox Nation (which I guess makes us the evil version of Yankees fans, because George Steinbrenner won't let his players grow goatees; but I digress). And I cannot under any circumstances imagine ever cheering for the Yankees to succeed at anything. They could be trying to keep a school bus full of children from falling over the edge of a bridge, and I'd be rooting for gravity.
So here's a tip, Rudy: I cheer for two teams, the Boston Red Sox, and whoever's playing the Yankees. You might want to try applying the bizarro version of that same logic if you want to convince voters that you actually stand for anything.
I assume that Yankees fandom is sort of like a parallel universe version of the Red Sox Nation (which I guess makes us the evil version of Yankees fans, because George Steinbrenner won't let his players grow goatees; but I digress). And I cannot under any circumstances imagine ever cheering for the Yankees to succeed at anything. They could be trying to keep a school bus full of children from falling over the edge of a bridge, and I'd be rooting for gravity.
So here's a tip, Rudy: I cheer for two teams, the Boston Red Sox, and whoever's playing the Yankees. You might want to try applying the bizarro version of that same logic if you want to convince voters that you actually stand for anything.
It's great that the Red Sox swept the Angels to advance to the American League Championship Series. It's even better that the Yankees dropped their own Division Series 3-1 at home, in front of a fair-weather crowd that had half-cleared out before the game was even over. Seeing the ignoble end to Roger Clemens' career only sweetened the deal.
But then, Joe Torre--who's all but certain to get fired after the Yankee's dismal post-season performance--went on ESPN right after the game and put the cherry right on top for me. When asked how he dealt with the extreme pressures he was under, he said, and I quote, "I bury myself in my players." Then he cried like a girl.
And suddenly, the Yankees are gayer than professional wrestling.
But then, Joe Torre--who's all but certain to get fired after the Yankee's dismal post-season performance--went on ESPN right after the game and put the cherry right on top for me. When asked how he dealt with the extreme pressures he was under, he said, and I quote, "I bury myself in my players." Then he cried like a girl.
And suddenly, the Yankees are gayer than professional wrestling.
So apparently Ben Stein has made a documentary that attacks the pro-evolutionary bias in the scientific community. Which is to say, he's made a documentary that attacks science. This pretty much burns through all of the cred he earned from the first season of Win Ben Stein's Money, assuming that every subsequent season of Win Ben Stein's Money didn't already do that.
What do you do when you're asked to write a review about a game you have no interest in? Turn it into a story about your mom instead.
It has now been scientifically proven that there's nothing quite like the smug sense of contentment that comes of being an English major:
Media studies and other trendy 'Mickey Mouse' degrees 'leave students disatisfied'
Now if you'll excuse me, I've got 30 more pages of Ulysses to get through in order to hone my witty cocktail party banter. Pinkies out, gentlemen, pinkies out.
EDIT: Don't know why the URL isn't linking. Here it is, if you want to follow it: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23411984-details/Media+Studies+and+other+trendy+'Mickey+Mouse'+degrees+'leave+students+disatisfied'/article.do
Media studies and other trendy 'Mickey Mouse' degrees 'leave students disatisfied'
Now if you'll excuse me, I've got 30 more pages of Ulysses to get through in order to hone my witty cocktail party banter. Pinkies out, gentlemen, pinkies out.
EDIT: Don't know why the URL isn't linking. Here it is, if you want to follow it: http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23411984-details/Media+Studies+and+other+trendy+'Mickey+Mouse'+degrees+'leave+students+disatisfied'/article.do
It seems like only yesterday, but today marks the sixth anniversary of an event that dramatically and irrevocably reshaped our society as we knew it. I'm talking, of course, about the release of Slayer's God Hates Us All, an album so perfectly, horrifically ferocious that on the day of its release, it inspired 19 fans to hijack airplanes and fly them into the World Trade Center and Pentagon, igniting a global conflagration that still rages unchecked six years later. Dethklok wishes they could have pulled off something half as brutal.
Homicide, suicide
Hate heals, you should try it sometime
Strive for peace with acts of war
The beauty of death we all adore
I have no faith distracting me
I know why your prayers will never be answered
God Hates Us All
God Hates Us All
Pessimist, terrorist targeting the next mark
Global chaos feeding on hysteria
Cut throat, slit your wrist, shoot you in the back fair game
Drug abuse, self abuse searching for the next high
Sounds a lot like hell is spreading all the time
I'm waiting for the day the whole world fucking dies
- Slayer, "Disciple"
Homicide, suicide
Hate heals, you should try it sometime
Strive for peace with acts of war
The beauty of death we all adore
I have no faith distracting me
I know why your prayers will never be answered
God Hates Us All
God Hates Us All
Pessimist, terrorist targeting the next mark
Global chaos feeding on hysteria
Cut throat, slit your wrist, shoot you in the back fair game
Drug abuse, self abuse searching for the next high
Sounds a lot like hell is spreading all the time
I'm waiting for the day the whole world fucking dies
- Slayer, "Disciple"
loading your activity feed...