Showing posts with label abuse of power. Show all posts
Showing posts with label abuse of power. Show all posts

Sunday, June 23, 2013

Humorless Ohio AG mugs ‘prescription’ coffee cup


This opinion piece was originally posted at Watchdog.org.

By Maggie Thurber | for Ohio Watchdog
Has Ohio Attorney General Mike DeWine helped get a potentially dangerous product off the shelves or does he just have no sense of humor?  Maybe he should be heeding Alcoholics Anonymous’ famous Rule No. 62: “don’t take yourself too damn seriously.”
COFFEE MUGGED: Urban Outfitter’s Prescription Line coffee mug that 22 state attorneys general believe is ‘not in any way fun.’
Here’s the issue:  does a coffee mug that mimics a prescription bottle and says “Prescription Coffee, RX#: VRY-CAF-N8D, Drink one mug by mouth, repeat until awake and alert” make fun of prescription drug abuse?
DeWine thinks so.
“People die from accidental drug overdoses in this state every day, and these products make light of the problem,” DeWine said in a May press release.   “We don’t find these products funny at all.”
“These products” referred to the Prescription Line produced by Urban Outfitters, Inc., a national company listed on NASDAQ with revenues of $2.8 billion and three locations in the state.
May was when DeWine and 22 other state attorneys general asked the company to pull the Prescription Line of glasses, coasters, mugs and drink holders.  On June 10, theAmerican Association of Poison Control Centers and 57 local poison centers wrote a similar letter asking that the products be removed.
The letter from the AGs, addressed to Richard Hayne, CEO and chairman of the company, said: ”These products demean the thousands of deaths that occur each month in the United States from accidental overdoses. These products are not in any way fun or humorous but make light of this rampant problem.”
The Partnership at Drugfree.org went further and categorized them as “prescription drug paraphernalia products.”
Urban Outfitters, in a statement issued earlier this week to CNN, gave in to the political pressure and announced they were pulling the products:
“In the 20,000 products that comprise our assortment, there are styles that represent humor, satire, and hyperbole.  In this extensive range of products we recognize that from time to time there may be individual items that are misinterpreted by people who are not our customer. As a result of this misinterpretation we are electing to discontinue these few styles from our current product offering.”
Politicians and anti-drug groups rejoiced and issued statements of praise for the decision.
Like beauty, humor is in the eye of the beholder and I thought the mugs were quite humorous, and nothing at all like drug paraphernalia.
I loved the hyperbole, especially since I’ve relied upon coffee as just ‘what the doctor ordered’ as a solution to a bleary-eyed, tired morning.  I’m sure others have felt the same way.
Drug abuse is a problem, whether it be prescriptions, alcohol or illegal substances.  It hurts not only the abuser, but their family and friends as well.
Most people probably don’t see the connection to the product.  I don’t think this mug makes light of the problem.  In fact, I see nothing whatsoever related to drug abuse, and I can’t understand how a mug could “undermine” government efforts to stop such abuse.
One could ask why that is the role of government in the first place – but will any of the products in the line really cause millions of people who use prescription drugs correctly to suddenly turn into addicts or abusers?
The News Herald in Panama City, Fla., one of the states whose AG signed the letter, opined:
“These public officials are going after jokes. That’s no laughing matter. Is there ANY evidence that hipster humor actually costs lives? Do people really see these jokey items as permission to break the law and engage in self-destructive behavior? If so, maybe the attorneys general also should look into persuading Urban Outfitters to stop selling Che Guevara posters, lest impressionable minds get the idea that Marxist revolution is romantic.”
When I was little we had candy cigarettes and bubble gum cigars.  They were popular for the fun of them, though the ‘cigar’ had more bubble gum than a regular piece did so it was a way to get more chewing pleasure for the price.
I didn’t grow up thinking I should smoke the real things as a result of these candies — and neither did any of my friends.   Peer pressure and parental habits had more to do with the decision to smoke — or not — than any candy ever did.
While I haven’t checked, I’d be surprised if those two candies did not come under similar pressure and are now outlawed.
Heaven forbid that we let children pretend about anything that might possibly harm them, like playing with a toy gun, drawing a picture of a gun or making a pastry into the shape of one.
Yet we have a government that believes a child should be able to get an abortion pill — a medical treatment with potential negative side effects both physical and psychological — without a prescription or even their parent’s knowledge.
What’s next? Forbidding jokes or even references to “what the doctor ordered” or “good for what ails you” in case someone might (inaccurately) perceive it as making light of people abusing prescriptions?
This isn’t really about prescription drug abuse — it’s about control.  Urban Outfitters will lose income and many individuals who liked the product will be deprived of its use.
But politicians and anti-drug groups will be able to claim a win, and the root problems that cause someone to begin abusing in the first place will continue.

Sunday, August 30, 2009

Sunday round-up

* Do you blame companies for making decisions based upon politics? Or do you blame the politicians?

This column by Thomas J. Borelli, PhD., the editor of FreeEnterpriser.com, takes a look at two companies, Whole Foods and GE, that are, indeed, making politics a core component of their business decisions - with drastic results. The fact that such considerations are contemplated is part of the problem. If government and various elected officials didn't write laws to benefit or harm particular industries/groups, there'd be no need for political considerations in the first place.

I wonder what our Founding Fathers would think of this...

* Patrick Henry is known by most people for his 'Give me liberty or give me death' rallying cry. But do you know what got him so angry as to make such a statement? Samantha Hagan, Director of the Patrick Henry Legacy Program at the Patrick Henry Center, has the background in this column, "Liberty and Gunpowder."

You see, Lord Dunmore, the royal governor of Virginia, seized a town's community supply of gunpowder and ordered the disabling of weapons stored in the public magazine. He did so following his disbanding of what today we'd call a house of representatives and the rallying of the public to Henry as a result of his impassioned speech.

"Patrick Henry demanded the return of the gunpowder, or failing that, he called for compensation to replace the colony’s fleeced supply. Lord Dunmore feared Henry and his men, and from the security of the palace he threatened to destroy the town should any hostilities begin.

For days the standoff continued until a deal was finally brokered in which a sum that both sides agreed upon was paid from the royal account to replace the stolen gunpowder."

Property rights, a core basis of our free nation, were also at the heart of the Revolution.

* From CNSNews.com:

"A new Government Accountability Office (GAO) study says that all levels of government – federal, state, and local – will have to come up with a total of $16.6 billion in additional revenue to purchase carbon allowances, if cap-and-trade – to allegedly combat global warming -- is enacted into law. Experts say this could prompt increases in taxes.

This is the second government report to estimate that the proposed climate-change legislation, formally known as the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009, will eventually cost consumers more.

A Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study published on June 19 revealed that the House cap-and-trade bill, passed by a 219 to 212 vote on June 26, would cost an estimated $175 per household every year."

How much are you willing to pay in additional taxes to *potentially* lower the temperature by a fraction of a degree???

* Andrew C. McCarthy, a senior fellow at the National Review Institute, has this scary perspective on Eric Holder's Hidden Agenda. For a long time, I have been concerned about actions by those in the federal government and the courts that seem to indicate a willingness to subject our sovereign nation to the whims of others. While we have a global economy, we do not (yet) have a global government - and that's a good thing. For the same reason I support states rights, I support the ability of nations to govern themselves. If people in positions of authority in our nation's government are not willing to support our nation's laws over all others, they don't deserve their places in that government. You cannot uphold our Constitution if you're willing to place it below the rules and laws of others.

Again I wonder what our Founding Fathers would think. Would the word 'treason' enter their minds?

* This is sick! Melissa Lafsky, at The Huffington Post, speculates on what Mary Jo Kopechne might think about the life of Sen. Edward Kennedy. She writes:

"Who knows -- maybe she'd feel it was worth it."

I think there's something wrong with any individual who would make such a comment. Perhaps I've misunderstood the post, but I find it hard to believe that the Kopechne family would agree - and I'm sure they knew Mary Jo much better than Lafsky.

Friday, March 14, 2008

UPDATED: Is this a legal use of city staff and resources???

This morning, I received a press release from Brian Schwartz. It was sent to all media contacts and those who've asked to be added to the list of entities receiving City of Toledo Press Releases (like me).

From:
"Schwartz, Brian"Schwartz, "Brian"
Date: Thursday, March 13, 2008 11:42 AM
Subject: Request for assistance from the media

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 13, 2008

Contact: Bob Reinbolt (419) 245-1007

(419) 654-2544

ASSISTANCE NEEDED IN LOCATING MISSING DOG

$1,000 REWARD OFFERED

Toledo, Ohio -- City of Toledo Chief of Staff, Robert Reinbolt, requests media assistance in notifying the public of his missing family pet. He is offering a $1,000 reward for her safe return.

Erin is a black and tan female mixed German Shepherd, weighing approximately 40 lbs. She has white on her chest and has a stubbed tail. She is not aggressive, but is timid around strangers.

She was last seen on March 10, heading north on Secor Road toward the Michigan border. Reports have ben (sic) received of a dog matching Erin's description in the Telegraph/Alexis, Douglas/Laskey, and Smith/Douglas areas.

Posters and advertisements have been placed in these areas and a $1,000 reward is offered for her safe return. Please call (419) 472-2594.

Erin is very small and the family fears she will not last long in the outdoors, so any assistance provided by local media to raise community awareness would be greatly appreciated by the Reinbolt family. Mr. Reinbolt understands the restrictions many media outlets have regarding this sort of request and appreciates any and all help he can get. As a strong pet lover, he encourages everyone seeing any stray dog to lend assistance as much as possible. To those who lose their pet, it is quite traumatic.


Since when did it become acceptable to use the resources of a city (money, staff, email, press contacts) to issue a notice of a lost dog for an employee? And is it legal to use these resources in this manner? If someone approaches a dog thinking it might be Reinbolt's, but it isn't, is the city then somehow liable for any bites that may result since they've encouraged citizens to approach stray animals? Think anyone ran this by the law department before issuing this release? And will they do this for other citizens?

Inquiring minds...

UPDATE: The Toledo Blade features this story on the front page of today's paper.

"“Am I using my position? Sure,” Mr. Reinbolt said yesterday.

“But I am going to do everything possible so we can get her back.”"


Two questions: 1) Since he admits he's using his position and city resources for a personal matter completely unrelated to the business of the city, should he be sanctioned in some way? 2) Could you imagine the impact if such city officials focused as much attention on a missing child - or in reducing the costs of city government?

Again, inquiring minds...
Google Analytics Alternative