Fri, Apr 18, 2014, 4:07 PM EDT - U.S. Markets closed for Good Friday

Recent

% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Altria Group Inc. Message Board

  • albert_gore_in_04 albert_gore_in_04 Nov 12, 2002 7:08 PM Flag

    It is immoral to support lung cancer

    We go after the terroirsts that threaten our country. And, now we need to go after the company that murders hundreds of thousands of people every decade.

    We also need to pass a new federal tax on cigarettes of about $5/package. When people have to spend $10 to $12 for a package of cigs they will quit.

    Also, the federal government should only permit the sale of cigarettes in government regulated outlets. And, then selling only to registered users. Then the government can restrict total sales not more than 1 pack a week.

    Cigarette smuggling would be treated like cocaine smugglers. A federal felony with a minimum sentence of 20 years.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • --If you are determined to believe the Bush Administration is lying about why we went to Afghanistan shouldn't we consider all of the benefits - including getting the doctor back to work?--

      Bush HAS TO lie about the war.
      Out side of a few investors who see the finacial gains of the action the "right" in this country would turn on the notion of security VIA secure oil flow, ONLY.

      Try an experiment, and ask people(specifically conservatives) who you know support the military action, and see what reasons they would accept for it.

      I rationalize it myself thru the thought that the people of the region will be better off, without despots like Saddamn and the Taliban.
      Funny thing tho, it is the same rationalization that I HATED during the Viet conflict, because the people we installed in the South were butchers.

    • Subj: Re: It is immoral to support a Hyena
      By: mo_terhead
      Date: 11/14/02 06:25 pm

      I actually did read the article. So?
      **the "so" is, no mention of weapons of mass destruction, only the financial benefits of siezing the oil fields.
      Why in that light, would you believe that the official reasons for Afghanistan, werent just for political expedientcy, and the real reason wasnt the pipeline?**

      ---------------------------------

      I don't get you sometimes, mo_terhead. The fact that there may be benefits of a war beyond the specific reason for actually going to war isn't unusual. And the fact that Fortune magazine would highlight the financial implications of a war is even less unusual. I would expect feminist magazines might publish articles about women being able to go back to work/school (unless they are blinded by anti-Bush hatred and would, therefore, not be inclined to publish anything that might show Bush in a favorable light - Clinton-Cons. Publications in reverse). Does that mean we went to war so some female doctor could treat patients?

      If you are determined to believe the Bush Administration is lying about why we went to Afghanistan shouldn't we consider all of the benefits - including getting the doctor back to work?

    • Other than than that, tell me "where we are" in Afghanistan, other than having a military base of operations on Irans eastern border?

      We are trying to get out of Afghanistan with our asses intact...

    • Re: It is immoral to support a Hyena
      by: sliverpinkie (42/M/Pink, CA) 11/14/02 01:54 pm
      Msg: 245135 of 245156

      b)if the purpose of the board is to "influence" others, why did you instist I stop

      ------------------------------------

      I didn't "insist" you stop. I stated (paraphrasing) that if you continue to trot out that theory people are liable to believe you are a "whack job". All of a sudden you care that people think you're a "whack job"?

      -------------------------------------
      more of a whack job than a MOron who insists it hasnt been proven that smoking kills?

      These boards are for meat and potatoes investors, looking for truth in an investing world FULL of lies.
      Just look at what Feldman said when MO was in the fifties.
      I believe that ALL investors, even MOrons, should look for financial truths that will affect them.
      Leave the flag waving rhetoric, to people who toss their money in mutual funds and then open a can of beer, while watching COPS.

    • Re: It is immoral to support a Hyena
      by: sliverpinkie (42/M/Pink, CA) 11/14/02 01:54 pm
      Msg: 245135 of 245156

      c)did you read the Fortune magazine link that I posted,
      have you ever listened to Kudlow on Iraq?
      Seems like the financial community is focusing in on OIL rather than weapons of mass destruction

      ------------------------------------

      I actually did read the article. So?
      **the "so" is, no mention of weapons of mass destruction, only the financial benefits of siezing the oil fields.
      Why in that light, would you believe that the official reasons for Afghanistan, werent just for political expedientcy, and the real reason wasnt the pipeline?**

      I haven't seen more than 10 minutes total of Kudlow & Cramer.

      The fact that you think that it is a big deal that the financial community is interested in the financial implications, i.e. oil, of a war with Iraq blows my mind. Is that the type of insight that you get from Kudlow
      **Kudlow, extremly wealthy, supply side economist, has views that rarely affect any on these boards.
      I believe him on this however**

    • Re: It is immoral to support a Hyena
      by: sliverpinkie (42/M/Pink, CA) 11/14/02 01:54 pm
      Msg: 245135 of 245156

      Subj: Re: It is immoral to support a Hyena
      By: mo_terhead
      Date: 11/13/02 07:34 pm

      a)How do you know I havent convinced anybody?

      ----------------------------------

      I don't. Though there is no evidence that anyone else believes that we could have got to where we are in Afghanistan with sanctions - have you seen a post agreeing with your theory?
      ------------------------------------------
      It appears by the release of Bin Ladens tape, that what WAS accomplished in Afghanistan, is the pipeline.
      This ABSOLUTELY COULD NOT have been accomplished thru sanctions.
      Other than than that, tell me "where we are" in Afghanistan, other than having a military base of operations on Irans eastern border?

    • Subj: Re: It is immoral to support a Hyena
      By: fatty_bass_turd
      Date: 11/14/02 01:59 pm

      I can't stand that show and it's not because both are jews. Both are just really strange dudes.

      -------------------------------

      I've seen Kudlow in other settings and I don't really have a problem with him. Cramer is an atrocity. He's all spin and entertainment with shaky substance.

    • I actually did read the article. So?

      I haven't seen more than 10 minutes total of Kudlow & Cramer.

      =========================================

      I can't stand that show and it's not because both are jews. Both are just really strange dudes.

    • Subj: Re: It is immoral to support a Hyena
      By: mo_terhead
      Date: 11/13/02 07:34 pm

      a)How do you know I havent convinced anybody?

      ----------------------------------

      I don't. Though there is no evidence that anyone else believes that we could have got to where we are in Afghanistan with sanctions - have you seen a post agreeing with your theory?

      ------------------------------------

      b)if the purpose of the board is to "influence" others, why did you instist I stop

      ------------------------------------

      I didn't "insist" you stop. I stated (paraphrasing) that if you continue to trot out that theory people are liable to believe you are a "whack job". All of a sudden you care that people think you're a "whack job"?

      -------------------------------------

      c)did you read the Fortune magazine link that I posted,
      have you ever listened to Kudlow on Iraq?
      Seems like the financial community is focusing in on OIL rather than weapons of mass destruction

      ------------------------------------

      I actually did read the article. So?

      I haven't seen more than 10 minutes total of Kudlow & Cramer.

      The fact that you think that it is a big deal that the financial community is interested in the financial implications, i.e. oil, of a war with Iraq blows my mind. Is that the type of insight that you get from Kudlow?

    • Re: It is immoral to support a Hyena
      by: bmfoiya (65/M) 11/13/02 09:53 pm
      Msg: 245058 of 245070

      "Are your ideas meant to go into a black hole?"

      That's PRECISELY where Turd's "ideas" are meant to go.

      It's like they are returning to the mothership.
      -----------------------------------
      Well at least they arent as stupid as your ideas

      "Reagan and the republicans made the hard choices, which lead to the economic benefits that Clinton blah blah blah"

      You sound like an IDIOT
      Reagan SPENT MORE than ALL the other presidents COMBINED(it did work tho)

      The last Democrat held congress made the hard choices when they passed the tax bill that lead to what Greenspan termed "tax suprises"
      This lead to surpluses, and the economy grew and stabalized.
      The Democrats, payed for this, by loseing the majority
      "ITS YOUR MONEY" they screamed
      ....yeah, but will they say that when you are looking for an unemployment check.
      Oh thats right...silly me...SOCIALISM, RIGHT BONEHEAD?

      silly little bitch

    • View More Messages
 
MO
38.45+0.09(+0.23%)Apr 17 4:00 PMEDT

Trending Tickers

i
Trending Tickers features significant U.S. stocks showing the most dramatic increase in user interest in Yahoo Finance in the previous hour over historic norms. The list is limited to those equities which trade at least 100,000 shares on an average day and have a market cap of more than $300 million.
Weibo Corporation
NasdaqGSThu, Apr 17, 2014 4:00 PM EDT
SandRidge Energy, Inc.
NYSEThu, Apr 17, 2014 4:01 PM EDT