Saturday, June 2, 2012

How It's Justified

Maybe I'll start this differently  telling you some weird things I have seen will make this easier I think,maybe not for you if you happen to be unlucky enough to read this but for me.

I had a boss once,he was a strange guy,he used to carry a small notebook in his pocket and wander around watching us as we worked.
One day I remember someone made him furious and he pulled out his little notebook and while he was standing where all of us could hear him he said "That's it,you're on my list."
The man was so insane and so controlling that he had  a list of people who he imagined had wronged him .
I can remember thinking  well now I know and now I have to watch myself around this man because I can never be sure exactly  what is going to make him come unglued.

I should probably mention that I work in retail and that this man has become a manager since this incident.
I know people who were on his list and many have been refused to have product enter his stores ect.
I worked for a selfish ,petty man who couldn't stand to be disagreed with,couldn't stand to not be the ultimate authority in his little world of retail and  controlling others that he made lists daily of those he would get even with if he had the chance.

I don't mention this to clarify things for you but I want to make sure that I explain this right or hell half right if that's even possible.

Last night I happened to be on twitter,I follow a large portion of the people in my sidebar on twitter because we share interest in the same things and I enjoy reading the things they write very much.
Christopher Snowdon was tweeting something pretty odd at Dick Puddlecote.
It appeared to be a small and very badly worded piece of text.(I suck with screenshots so bare with me) describing him as a blogger.
That seemed odd so I went to his twitter page and read what had to be about the oddest thing I had ever read in my life.
Apparently there's a list.
A list full of people (bloggers and libertarians,scientests and people who lobby their governments).
In reality what exists is a list of people who happen to disagree with the things tobacco control calls truth.

All I'm going to talk about here is the unpaid bloggers, because to be honest that is all I know.

When a person starts writing its out of a need I think.

I started blogging because I don't belong.

I think from reading so many of the pro choice blogs for so long that feeling isn't uncommon.
And eventually  if you're very lucky you get to read about how other people feel and when you share the same thoughts and feelings it's like a gift.

And because of great good fortune you find a community of sorts of different voices online and many of them say the things you wish you were clever enough or smart enough to say.

Those blogs become part of your day if your very lucky and you feel a bit less alone.

I think they the people who started this list are doing this to try and toss great gobs of mud at the unpaid bloggers who disagree with them.

It's far easier to discredit your opponent,to cripple them,to bloody them than to fight fairly with them, although with the cash they have at their disposal there is no fair.

There's just people venting their frustration and being harassed for it.

And what bothers ME most is that this sort of thing is how it's justified.

Smoking,Food,Display Bans and Apparently Size Does Matter

Not much besides links I'm afraid.
But considering I'm not a great writer that's probably a very good thing.

Nicotine Addiction~said to be gold ?

I have always had a soft spot for smokers. They are on the frontline of the battle between puritanical wowsers and "live for the moment" hedonists. My real concern is that once the smokers have been wiped out they'll come after us boozers. I used to enjoy sitting in the smoking section of aeroplanes because smokers tend to be drinkers so when I raised my hand for a refill it was one in a sea of raised hands.
The air hostesses would provide a top-up with an indulgent smile. I felt comfortable in the company of fellow hedonists. It also meant I was less likely to be pestered by a fellow passenger intent on sharing his love of the Lord or the latest Amway scheme. Smokers were too busy puffing and guzzling the free grog to bother anyone.

Supreme Court documents show the Zurich-based Nuance Group, the owner of Downtown Duty Free - which eventually pleaded guilty to breaking the law - said section 16 of the act did not apply on constitutional grounds. Section 16 states a person ''must not, in New South Wales … display a tobacco advertisement''.
The company argued the store was not in NSW for regulatory purposes and should therefore be regulated by the Commonwealth Tobacco Act. Its compliance officer believed that under that law tobacco could be displayed in a certain format and remain within the law. Photos taken by a health inspector, Michael Cassidy, show the store placed health warnings above the displays.

The Mayor believes that government has a duty to educate its citizens and even to "nudge" them in the right direction, as the fashionable behaviorial economists like to say. But the real lesson here is that a government that pays most health-care bills will soon be dictating the everyday behavior of its people. An America that needs government to protect its citizens from 20-ounce sodas has bigger problems than obesity.

Because the cases are all about tobacco. 
The way our court system works, the outcome of each of these cases has serious implications for food policy, so it’s critical that advocates concerned about obesity and advertising to children pay attention and maybe even get involved.
In a “common law” system like ours, the decision of one court on one topic area may influence—or even bind—a later court interpreting a similar legal provision. So a court interpreting the First Amendment in a cigarette marketing case could be deciding not just what goes for tobacco but what goes for any product that any company wants to advertise.