The upshot of this idiotic
proposal by the Health Minister will be
nothing more than a diminution of disposable income for a quarter of
the Japanese population. This is just what a country suffering from a
decades old lack of consumer spending and stagnation needs. The new
unapologetic smoking Prime Minister Noda should sack this zany health
bureaucrat at the first opportunity.
Want to see our
referenced article on smoking in Japan? Click
here.
If
you think it's impossible to remove smoke from a room you should read
this.
Iowa Straw Polls
Ron Paul's One Percent Solution
If you're an Iowan and a Republican and you smoke, would you please do
the nation a big favor? Would you get out and vote in the August 13
Iowa Straw Poll for Ron Paul and get his

campaign momentum rolling in high gear. Do it for your fellow smoking,
overweight, fun-loving. easy-going sisters and brothers. And do it for
your country.
This nation can't take much more of the smothering nannyism the Obamas'
(Both Barry and Let's Move Michelle) and the Democrat nouveau Puritans
are bringing to the table. And the Republican's aren't much better at
times. Luckily, Mother Hen Mike Huckabee has stepped aside. Tim
Pawlenty talks the talk, but raised cigarette taxes in Minnesota.
Michelle Bachmann is too much of an unknown entity. As is Mitt Romney
who, as a Mormon, is unlikely to show much lenience towards any of our
beloved vices.
Ron Paul is a doctor and, as such is said to personally dislike tobacco.
But he's also a committed, practicing libertarian. He holds the concept
of private property and personal freedom as sacred. Ron Paul's time has come. If we don't
elect him,

he's already said that he'll be retiring from his house seat after his term expires. This is our last chance at him.
Here's what we know. There are 430,000 smokers in Iowa. If just one out
of one hundred (4,300) would show up and vote for Mr. Paul it would
likely put him over the top, or at the very least provide him a very
strong second place showing. In 2007, Mitt Romney won it with 4,516
votes (31%). Mother Hen Mike came in second with 2587 votes
(18.1%) John McCain got just 101 votes and came in 10th. Ron Paul came in 5th place with 1305 votes (9.1%) - something we don't
want to see repeated this time around.
One out of a hundred. Just imagine that if you will. Surely you're sick
and tired of paying high taxes and being treated like a modern day
leper. Get out and vote and encourage anyone you know who is Republican
and on the wrong side of the BMI index to join you in voting for Dr.
Paul. This is both doable and mission critical. Your nations future as
a free country full of individuals hangs in the balance. It's that or
more ObamaCare, scowling health nazi Kathleen Sebelius, Tobacco Nutter
William V. Corr, and FDA grafitti artist Margaret Hamburg. Oh, and we
almost forgot first lady Michelle 'LetsMove.org' Obama.
One percent of Iowa's smokers can legalize freedom. Pass it on.
And speaking of FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg read on to find out what she's got in store for your cigarette packs come next October. Scroll down.
UPDATE: Ron
Paul did indeed take second place. How's that for prescience on our
part? The MSM took absolutely no note of his second place finish, a
scant 152 votes behind Rep. Bachmann, who was campaigning one state away
from Minnesota. Meet the Depressed and ABC whatever-they-call-it should
hang their heads in shame for the complete lack of coverage. Lots of
air time about Texas tobacco tax raising Rick Perry (Major Boo!!!) and
Tim Pawlenty (he's dust now, yet more prescience) and wall-to-wall
interviews of the barely victorious Bachmann.
As the
MSM talking heads badmintoned about, trading esoteric talking points
predicting how and why We the People would vote when it all comes out
in the wash in 2012, one couldn't help but notice how worthless they've
become. Not one mention of Ron Paul. He will win despite the total
media blackout by the brain-dead, rapidly fading pundits of the
old-fashioned megaphone media.
When Ron Paul becomes
the new President in 2012 they will all come out of the woodwork
crowing "We told ya' so!" Yeah, right.
Pre-Update:
The Republican debate turned out to be a real Friday night barn burner.
Ron Paul clashed repeatedly with boy scouty Rick Santorum over defense
spending, a candidate so weak he should voluntarily withdraw so as not
to dilute the voting pool (and he should take Gingrich and Pawlenty
with him).
Here is a
quote from Yahoo! News:
"Paul was once again the crowd
favorite. He will do well in the straw poll. When he talks about
individual liberty and spending restraint, it sounds far more authentic
than when the other candidates sound similar themes."
There
was a surprising tussle between fellow Minnesotans Michelle Bachmann
and Tim Pawlenty in which she critcized the former governor for raising
cigarette taxes! That shows that she is not afraid of glancing off the
supercharged third rail of smoking issues. The woman certainly
has guts. She also nicked him for his support of cap and trade, another
good point in her favor. The problem is that she too voted for the
cigarette tax as a state senator.
The fact that a
cigarette tax was even raised for discussion probably sent millions of
the tobacco community simultaneously reaching for the volume control on
the remote.
It all started off with a question for
Tim Pawlenty after he bragged about balancing his state budgets without
raising taxes. Here is what followed verbatim.
YORK: "We're going to go to
Governor Pawlenty next. Governor you say you balanced every budget
without tax increases as governor of Minnesota, but in 2005 you levied
a new tax on cigarettes, which you called a health impact fee."
Pawlenty
squirmed and wiggled and made an excuse that the deal he struck with
the Democratic legislature over cigarettes was called a health fee
rather than a tax. To the payers it is all the same regardless of the
label.
Another development in Rep. Bachmann's favor
was her declaration that she actually fought against the cigarette
health fee. This is the first indication of any position from her concerning smoking we've
ever managed to find.
Additionally, in the comments
section, several Democrats and outright Obama supporters admitted that
if they were to cross the aisle and vote for a Republican, it
would be for Dr. Paul. This is the independent swing vote which, when
combined with the smoker vote, will catapult him over the
Reformed
smoker in the White House in 2012.
Led
by tobacco neurotic Margaret Hamburg
OBAMA'S
TAGGING CREW AT THE FDA SET TO STRIKE SOON
Just
when the automobile industry is showing signs of making a
recovery how do you suppose they'd react to something like this?
Hey, if they can do it to the tobacco industry, why not the carmakers?
And why not Obama Motors? What is good for the goose is good for the
gander. Cars not only kill people by way of mangled steel road wrecks,
but
they pollute the air with deadly exhaust fumes as well. The
yellowish-brown-gray pall lingering over Los Angeles at the end of each
day certainly isn't coming from tobacco products. If we're going to
save precious
lives with gruesome product labels, the front door of your vehicle
would seem to be an excellent place to start. Before you turn that
ignition key or start a conversation on your cellphone as you hurtle
down the highway at 65 miles an hour, a graphic warning of what could
happen to you and your extra vulnerable child passenger is an
entirely pertinent necessity.
The
Obama administration and its tagger crew, led by FDA chief Margaret
Hamburg, is about to spray paint ugly grafitti all over that pack of
smokes you just paid a small fortune for. In New York City that might
amount to as much as $15. The new packaging is due to commence this
October 2012, which will give you one whole month to think over how to
return
the favor by graffiti-ing your
ballot (in the eyes of the Democratic Party) on the first Tuesday in
November, 2012. By then
you'll
probably have bought yourself an attractive cigarette case but, just
for that
day, we suggest bringing your trashed-up pack along unsheathed as a
visual
reminder of just who the guilty party was.
By now
everyone knows
the story behind Obama's transition from Marlboro smoker to the
archetype, vindictive ex-smoker who has decided that because he's
taken
the plunge and suffered through the horrific pleasure-denial pangs of
quitting,
that
it's your turn now. Wife Michelle made his foreswearing the guilty
pleasure a
prerequisite
to her helping him campaign for the oval office. Does anyone really
believe she'd have sat the race out in utter silence if he'd
refused to kneel down to her demands?
This dreadful
Reformed Smoker
president has turned into a smokers worst nightmare. From his
measure-the-White-House-for-drapes transition team that included
William V. Corr, the vile control-freak behind The Campaign for Tobacco
Free Kids, to
Kathleen Sebilius to Nancy-Ann De Parle and finally to FDA commish
Margaret Hamburg, this guy has come after smokers with a cruel
vengeance.
Two
weeks into his term he foisted the SCHIP tax increase on us. Then came
the PACT legislation (the chief sponsor was Anthony Weiner, D-NY) which
made
it impossible for us to save some money on cigarette purchases via the
internet. Control of tobacco was then turned over to the FDA, headed up
by
Ms Margaret Hamburg, which led to this final straw of defacing our
cigarette packs.
One of the most insidious aspects
of
Prohibition v2.0 has been the redefinition of what constitutes private
property. A pack of cigarettes starts out the property of the tobacco
company, goes through the distribution channel, and finally ends up as
a possession of the smoker. The government is directing the tobacco
companies to purposely uglify their product packages, thereby
theoretically discouraging their sale. This is setting a hideous
precedent and it's done all in the name of an unachievable, pie-in-the-sky public
health goal. The sheer futility of this exercise in tyranny was
expressed by a frazzled commissioner Hamburg when she justified her
actions on the grounds that government efforts to eradicate
tobacco had entered into stall mode since 2004. In other words, we
asked
you all nicely to quit or else and since you don't respond, well, we have
our ways to make you comply.
There are times when
the
FDA commissioner seems to be channeling famed spinmeister Joseph
Goebbels.
In announcing her intention to begrime the private property of
reticent-to-comply smokers, she smugly invited 
the
general public to pile
on to her public enemy number one's by
participating in selecting the eventual grotesque labels. She
actually eerily
resembles the former
Minister of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda. Perhaps an
enterprising cigarette case maker
will capitalize on this. How's this for a snazzy cigarette case
frontispiece. What do you
think, fellow smokers?
Goebbels exerted totalitarian
control over the media,
arts and information in Germany. The antismoking power lobby has
adopted many of his brassy tactics. By the way, Poor Joe
had to sneak around behind the big bossman's horrific glare when he
wanted
some nicotinic relief from the stresses and strains of vilifying German
smokers, drinkers and Jews. You heard that right, Joseph Goebbels smoked.
In
an interview with the terminally cool, Ambien-voice radioheads
at
NPR (National Public Radio) she improbably seemed to back off of any
personal responsibility for the gruesome, state-sponsored graffiti
attack she is unleashing. She told the All Things Considered
show that
"Well, we are responding to congressional action. A vote was taken, a
law was implemented, and specifically we were asked to put in place
these warning labels." It almost sounds like the "We vere only
followink orders" alibi.
Hamburg
could have gone retro by including some period pieces from the original
antismoking boys of Berlin. After all, this demonization thing isn't
all
that new, it's been done before, with similar results - abject failure.
Adolf
said: "Before going into retirement, I shall
order that all the cigarette packets on sale in Europe
should have on the label, in letters of fire, the slogan: 'Danger,
tobacco smoke kills; danger: Cancer.'
Where'd we
get this stuff and this graphic from?
Why none other than the National
Alliance News - News for White People
Worldwide. One of its administrators had posted it
boastfully under
the
title "Adolph Hitler - World's First Anti-Smoking Champion". Go there
and see for yourself if this seems too unbelievable to be true.
http://www.adolfthegreat.com/Trails-Talent/lungcancer.html
Here
is some of the accompanying text:
Because
of strong Nazi support for Science and medical research, most
scientists, physicians and biologists became Nazi party members.
Germans
were encouraged to take exercise, eat plenty of vegetables, drink
mineral water instead of alcohol and stop smoking.
To
reduce breast
cancer, women were taught self examination. Nowhere else in the world
had such a government sponsored health campaign existed up to that
time. When the
Allies invaded at the end of World War II, on seeing the terrible
hunger and
deprivations amongst the destitute public, they promptly imported
93,000 tons of tobacco to get Germans smoking again.
Here's
a couple of classic period pieces that should surely dissuade
youngsters
from
starting the habit, once again with that ever-popular retro look. It
looks like either would fit right into the top 50% of the pack (as
required) quite nicely, eh?
Ms
Hamburg justified her action on the grounds that the smoking
prevalence rate was no longer dropping and it was time to turn up the
heat on smokers, long the object of her derision and scorn. "That
propaganda is
good which leads to success, and that is bad which fails to achieve the
desired result, it is not propaganda's task to be
intelligent, its task is to lead to success." This quote, while not
directly attributable to Dr. Hamburg, would nonetheless seem to sum up her
position accurately. Her cross gender doppelganger of seventy years
past
wrote that.
The
unmistakable mirror imaging of present day Standard US Government Perfect
Human Specimen guidelines
with its 'culture of the body' counterpart of 1930's Germany is
defensively brushed off by public health experts as a fallacy. How in
the
world is the health and welfare of its' citizenry not a proper function
for the role of government intervention, they'll argue. To
anyone
with a sense of history, it sure feels creepy. The fact that refraining
from tobacco and fast foods has become some sort of national duty
should give everyone pause.
Hamburg
has long been
part of
what can only be described as a continuing pogrom of the smoking
culture from our country. She'll be able to rest only after the last
cigarette in America is extinguished. Her mother and father will be
proud when this moment arrives.
Daddy David Hamburg
got into the
smoking prevention game very early on. Over thirty years ago, when
nobody really gave a damn, there was Dr. Hamburg with his hand
in producing a report grossly exaggerating the health risks of tobacco
consumption. One wonders why the Hamburg family doesn't simply choose
to privately abhor smoking rather than rallying everyone within earshot
to their
particular disposition, one which is rudely dividing our society in the
process.
Margaret's
daddy spent his early days in peon studies focused on psychiatry.
Perhaps he should have a leather couch session with daughter dearest
to probe
just what is behind her sociopathic personality.
She
is gleefully implementing and pushing hard for labels that stand a very
good chance of breaking
the maternal bonding process between mothers who smoke and their
offspring.
This is sick. Pure and simple sick. Margaret Hamburg couldn't care
less. Where's
daddy's input when you really need it?
If
you happen to be a young smoking mother, you had better not leave one
of these packs laying around the house for your impressionable nestling
to view. This entirely predictable side effect is ignored by the
callous commissioner. And where's the depiction of the father exhaling?
Not
enough shock value in that apparently. Hamburg is one sick puppy.
This
is also an insulting slap in the face to all of those post war
baby-boomer moms who regularly smoked around their children during that
high smoking prevalence era, which coincided with the largest
population boom in our history. Millions upon millions of their
offspring
miraculously managed to survive. If you're between the age of
forty to sixty-five years of age, you're likely one of them.
Papa
Hamburg the shrink also dabbled in the realm of psychosomatics. He
studied at
The Institute for
Psychosomatic and Psychiatric Research and Training at the Michael
Reese Hospital in Chicago (1953-56). Seeing as a goodly proportion of
the perceived health dangers of smoking (second and third hand smoke
comes to mind) by a terrified populace is indeed psychosomatic in
nature, you might think she'd have some insight into the subject.
Instead she just keeps plugging away, spewing the same-old, worn out
boilerplate drivel. And she's convinced herself that it's all grounded
in settled science and therefore real.
By
this token, she might even find herself with a harrowing case
of
self-imagined lung cancer or, worse yet, a real stroke brought on by
her overwhelming fantasized fear of tobacco contamination. She was
born in 1955
and, as such, it's a pretty safe assumption that she was exposed to
volumes of secondhand smoke for the first 35 years of her life.
The
wily Britblogger Leg Iron had a typically amusing take on rendering
psychosomatic injury to our good, trembling antismoking friends. Check
it out:
"They
will think that because I smoke, I can
give them a disease. I can.
I can give you high blood pressure and possibly a heart attack, maybe
even an aneurysm, just by standing near you. Not because of any real
toxins but simply because you believe it. I can induce all sorts of
psychosomatic symptoms just by sitting next to you on the bus and
letting it be known that I smoke. With this level of preconditioning, I
can induce real chest pains in people just by describing them. I don't
need to be able to hypnotise you first. That's already been done. All I
need do is drop in the suggestion.
And don't think I
won't."
Read it and weep Dr. David Hamburg, your
daughter may be the next in line.
Even
mama bear Hamburg was a rabid antismoker. Beatrix Hamburg was
a
member of the Advisory Board of the Institute
for the Study of Smoking Behavior at Harvard University, circa 1987.
They don't come much more hardcore tobacco neurotic than this family.
Oh, and did we mention that Margaret was New York City's heath
commissioner in the 1990s where she fought
for a total ban on indoor smoking in public places long before states
and cities began adopting such aggressive restrictions.

Is this scary enough
to make you quit?
RJ
Reynolds and Lorillard are fighting the regulation in court. Hopefully
they will win their case and the FDA can go back to some other more
useful pursuit involving either food or drugs, neither of which tobacco
is. The Association of National Advertisers is considering jumping in
to the fray as well, as the
prospect of having Uncle Sam and his cronies on future packaging
design teams can't be a good thing. Uncle Sam and Aunt Margaret
don't do anything very well. The ANA rightfully contends that the new
text and graphics requirements would convert product packages
and marketing into platforms for the government's viewpoint.
Unless
the tobacco
companies are
successful in their pending lawsuit against the Food and Drug
Administration, it is a safe bet that an old smoking accessory - the
cigarette case - will make a rip roaring comeback in the fall of 2012.
If you can find a pure play enterprise with this specialty product at
the top line, invest heavily in it.
CALIFORNIA
BAD DREAMIN'
If you guessed that this website is
Made in California, you guessed right. And if you savor living your life
pretty much just as you please, you're likely no fan of California. The
state's role as a legislative trend setter might have been the
catalyst behind that new anti-smoking ordinance you're stuck with. Or
maybe a new soda tax or the elimination of Happy Meals, the list goes
on and on.

Super
talented musician Joni Mitchell once wrote
a song about coming back to California to bask in its tolerant,
freedom-loving social climate. At one time people actually moved here
to loosen up. You do remember Joni Mitchell don't you? You know, "Paved
paradise, put up a parking lot", yeah that's her. She likes to smoke
and compose brilliant, complicated melodies. If you live in Los Angeles,
that paved parking lot is about the only place you still can have a
smoke in public. She's had enough of the sunshine and liberal fascism,
she's a musician who is saying goodbye
to uptight LA. The Canadian native has another home on British
Columbia's sunshine coast to escape the nouveau Puritan bad vibes of
the Golden State. Here's a stanza from her song
California:
Still
a lot of
lands to see
But
I wouldn't want to stay here
It's too old and cold and settled
in its ways here
Oh, but California
California I'm
coming home
I'm going to see the folks I dig
I'll
even kiss a sunset pig
California I'm coming home
Over
at Rich White's excellent website
Smoke
Screens we happened upon a
thought provoking guest blog posting laid down by one Juliette
Tworsey,

lead singer and guitarist from the band Firebug.
She too likes to
smoke and write music. She moved to Los Angeles from Chicago a
couple of years ago probably expecting to find a tolerant,
freedom-loving place. Instead she's run up against rude, tyrannical
doormen at local nightclubs who've been emboldened by antismoking
laws passed by the
horrid LA city council. She's learned to avoid certain towns like god-awful, leftwing Santa Monica, because of their rigid regulations that
even include a ban on smoking on patios in apartments and condos. These
ordinances
will wind up outlawing barbecuing on the patio as well, because
that would also
qualify as secondhand smoke. To live and die in LA is to perpetually
walk on Nanny State eggshells.
She'll
need to bypass nearby Calabasas, California, too. It's against the law
to
smoke anywhere there and Juliette is a redhead*. California is, as one
commenter at
Banging on
About the Smoking Ban opined, "a hell-hole". All of this
over the
completely legal and non-intoxicating
intake of tobacco.

So
why all this hubbub over one state's obsessive hangup with smoking in
public? It's because like it or not, California does influence the rest of
the world with its long cultural coattails. California has a very big
mouth and
places literally on the other side of the earth, like Tunisia,
seem to
be following its healthist, do-gooder lead.
Among
the many highlights Tworsey includes is this observation of life in
LA:
"In the
last
few years, I have witnessed an increase in vitriolic hatred
towards smokers, due in large part to the never ending barrage of
anti-smoking adverts that we are subjected to almost daily, thanks in
large part to the voter-approved prop 99."Indeed
Prop 99,
approved by voters in 1988, is a nasty little piece of deviance that
collects a quarter per pack from smokers which goes into a fund that
scores of California's university junk scientists/parasites habitually
tap into
for
financial sustenance. There's a particularly ominous angle to 99 that
we've never
seem reported before; it was used as a vehicle by the
California Department of Health Services to defeat yet another
ballot proposition a decade later that would have repealed Rob Reiner's Prop 10. Meathead's Prop 10
doubled down on Prop 99's twenty-five cent ripoff by boosting the tax
by fifty cents per pack.
Back in
the year 2000, just two years after Prop 10's razor thin passage, Ned
Roscoe, a
Libertarian and owner of the discount chain of smoke shops
Cigarettes Cheaper, managed to qualify Prop 28 on the ballot. It
called for the repeal of Reiner's dreadful and patently unfair tax
measure. In the final month before the election, television viewers
were bombarded with a constant barrage of anti-smoking public service
messages courtesy of the California Department of Health Services, whose coffers we're bulging at the seams from Prop 99 money.
You
want talk about a dangerous precedent set in motion, here it is.
When state agencies start taking sides on ballot initiatives,
using taxpayer funds to sway voters, it's a bad day for democracy. As
government
employees tend toward the left end of the political
spectrum, various arms of the government could then become
stealth campaigners for Democrat candidates by way of PSA's
disguised as health and safety messages. That is precisely what went
down in 2000. Needless to say, Prop 28 went down also. It was dirty
politics and technically illegal, but it was successful nonetheless.
Tworsey
continues on with her "Life in LA" guest post:
"So,
are people still smoking in Southern California?
The irony is that I have never seen so many smoke shops open
in such
close proximity to one another as I have witnessed in the last couple
of years. This would seem to imply that, despite anti-smoking
statistics, people are now smoking MORE, not less."
"Ah,
but what would I know…I'm only someone who actually lives in the city."
She's
got a good point here. There is very likely an undercount of the
prevalence of
smokers in LA. Who in their right mind wants to respond to a survey and
admit to smoking, given the current poisoned public opinion towards the
subject? No one trusts the disclaimers that promise not to sell their
information to third parties. To answer affirmatively might be to wind
up on someones DO NOT RENT TO or DO NOT HIRE list.
The
two
mega-population centers of California - San Francisco and Los Angeles -
seem to be hell-bent on outbidding one another in
the virtuosity vendue of which is the
more smoker unfriendly city. They both boast of achieving a sub-15%
smoking
prevalence by making smoking an anti-social, unpopular affair.
Prevalence is an
empty, cold hearted stat when you take
into account a combined population of more than 25 million
people
between the two urban sprawls. Even at 15%, that prevalence amounts to
3,750,000
alienated human beings
not at all content with their newfound subhuman status.
San
Franciscans look down their persnickety noses on flashy Los Angelenos,
considering them ostentatious and less sophisticated plebs. The feeling
is not mutual. LA people nurse an inferiority complex of sorts that
they then try to overcompensate for by adopting soppy social causes so
as to be 'taken seriously'. They want you to know that it's not all
glitz and glamour on Sunset Boulevard, why just look at all of the
public service announcements featuring young, rich movie idols
made for NBC's "The More You Know". And the rest of the world is
beginning to despise
both
cities after reading about some of their outrageous lifestyle
regulation ordinances. A growing number of Europeans are crossing them
off their vacation itineraries.

Tworsey
lances some subterranean, festering angst with her fine essay. The ten
comments that
follow it are compelling to read. There is a lot more going on in
Tinseltown than meets the eye of the casual mainstream media coverage
observer. Ditto for the audiences soaking in the ubiquitous and
monotonous 'smoke-free dining' PSA's one hears 24/7 on LA talk radio, announcing the smog capital's latest round of outdoor smoking
regulations. The "30-Second Hates" are narrated by a woman whose
gleefully passive-aggressive, yet intimidating voice resembles that
of a North Korean
newscaster announcing that nations' intention to go nuclear with anyone
who dares not comply with their wishes. The ghastly haze pictured in this
postcard perfect shot of Los Angeles is not from secondhand smoke, but
you already knew that. Try pointing that out to LA councilman Bernard
Parks, a man whose automobile undoubtedly contributes to the problem,
and you'll get a Barney Fife-like lecture on the far more eminent
danger of phantom transient cigarette fumes. That's cool Bernie, you
just keep whistling past the graveyard if it makes you feel safer.
Even if you
could care less about what
happens in the People's Republic of California, you should
read this article and then bookmark Juliette's excellent website -
Jredheadgirl. On top of making some
really good music, she's a trench fighter for the right to be left
alone in peace to enjoy the subtle, wizardly pleasures of the golden
leaf. We
even made use of an article her site led us to, by Danish researcher
Klaus K, as inspiration and background for the following paragraphs on music
and smoking. The Jredheadgirl blog supplies 200% of the recommended
minimum daily requirement of useful information.
Despite
the never-ending cacophony of imagined negative side effects unraveled by
universities and fake charities and spun out to the masses, they'll
never pin a scarlet letter on musicianship and smoking. It requires
more than just dumb luck to write a good song, it takes focus and
concentration, two well-known beneficial side effects of nicotine.
Here's a quote
from Klaus K's blog:
"The brain works better when
it gets nicotine - almost like an optimized computer. Nicotine is a
"work-drug"
that enables its consumers to focus better and think faster."
Joni
Mitchell herself weighed in on the benefits of smoking. Here's a couple
of memorable quotes, both from the summer of 2008.
"...Don't
get her started on the anti-smoking mood of our times. The reason, she
claims, is political, not concern for health. She has been smoking
since the age of 9 and considers it a form of self-medication. She
spoke wistfully of the days of a rough childhood in North Battleford,
when she would ride her bike to the edge of town to enjoy lighting up
and watching the birds. 'That was the best part of my childhood,' she
said.
'Nobody has any
focus any more. I think it's because they quit smoking'",
Toronto Star (Canada), Jun. 12, '08)
She went on to
say to the Irish Times:
"She
remains an enthusiastic advocate of smoking. 'How did Ireland give up
so easily on smoking?' she asks. 'People are going to die of butter, or
alcohol, or something. Why pick on cigarettes? I really couldn't have
gotten through life without them, because I have a certain kind of
nervous temperament and they calm me. I also couldn't have done as
much, because smoking helps me to focus.
I
was sitting on a terrace in LA and this guy complains about the smell
of smoke. I hadn't even lit up. Then I overheard him complaining that
nobody can concentrate anymore and I said, 'Yeah, it's because they're
not smoking'. The world is so full of ex-smokers, I don't know how
anyone gets anything done'", Irish Times, Jul. 19, '08.
Joni
Mitchell is the consummate musician, definitely one of the finest to
ever
strum a Martin guitar whilst employing one of her forty different
tunings for our lucky
ears. Her singing voice is simply divine. The song California was from
her 1967 album
Blue.
Joni
Mitchell's album
Blue was ranked #30 on
Rolling
Stone Magazine's
list of the 500 Greatest Albums
of All Time,
the highest placement for a female artist.
Now
that you've read this article sans the annoying mental interruptions of
blue underlined links, we've got a whole raft of them to catch up on
here.
First we'd like to
point you in the direction of Rich White's excellent website
Smoke Screens: The Truth
About TobaccoRich is the
author of a book bearing this same title, which
is available for purchase at his web page.
Making sense of the jumble of tobacco science twisted by
inconclusive conclusions, torn by double negatives, and obscured
by confounding confounders, is what Rich does best. Let him separate
the wheat from the chafe for you; just do what Laura Bush
used to fancy
doing before she quit, smoke and read.
Here's
Juliette Tworsey's guest post
"Life
in LA", it is a must read. When you've arrived there, you've
arrived at Rich's blog. Be sure and click on the archives, there's a
lot of good reads contained therein.
And
last but not least, here is Juliette's splendid web site
Jredheadgirl*See
our article on Calabasas and
redheads
A Startling Huffington
Post CommentCONVERTING
LEFTIES TO
SAVE THE NATION FROM DOOM
Smoking in the Huffington
Room
On occasion, we still boldly strive to convert lifestyling Lefties into libertarian Righties here at smokervoter.com. Some
would say it's an impossible dream and not worth the effort. It most
certainly is an uphill battle. But something has to be done or we will
end up with a Nanny State so entrenched and tyrannical that eventually
there will be nothing, not even what outfit to wear to work, left for the individual to choose in the very near future.
If
you ever find yourself out in a clover patch

with some free time on your hands, you'll
probably start surveying the
immediate area for that mystical, illusive four-leaf exception. We
happened upon just such a specimen the other day after stumbling upon
an article at the left-leaning
Huffington
Post which featured White House Press
Secretary Robert Gibb's revelation that Obama hadn't smoked for the
past nine months.
There
are some who are skeptical about this claim. There's a lot of square
footage at the executive mansion and sneaking a smoke somewhere isn't
beyond the realm of possibility. The president has been less than
honest at times, like when he increased taxes on minimum wage earning
smokers after promising not to raise taxes on the middle class during
the campaign. On the other hand with militant cancer
survivor and
Face the
Nation host Bob Schieffer hot on the trail, he'd
better be extra careful. Bob's been trying to get the President and
John Boehner together over at the National Institute for Health to quit
smoking together in a mushy kumbaya moment.
Wall
eyed Bob and the media dinosaurs at CBS managed to scoop the nimble
blogsters at Huffpo when in his closing monologue he included
effusive praise for Obama for quitting the habit. The Huffington Post
was stuck with an antiquated White House press briefing for its
content. With smoking becoming one of the ultra volatile issues of our
times, the word count of the public comments far exceeded that of the
actual article. After a raft of predictable Hoorays!
and Hurrahs! and accusations of the Republicans sleeping with the
tobacco
industry, out of nowhere (left field actually) came this nonplussed
comment from a brave progressive poster who shall remain nameless:
"Just
because I am the kind of person who likes to intentionally explore
other perspectives, AND because I have an innate sense that this
obsession with smoking and moralizing over it is being hyperbolized,
I googled the following: "Activities more deadly than smoking". Drum
roll, please...
Mobile Phones
Obesity
Soda pop
Un-protected sex
Being a couch potato
Alcohol use
I am not pro-smoking. I am pro-informing. And I am certainly
anti-hyping, anti-moral superiorizing, anti-crusading.
They want to put pictures of diseased lungs on cigarette packs now?
What's next: decals of obese depressed people attached to sofas?
Chicken Little: "The sky is falling!"
Recently said: "That one puff on that cigarette could be the one that
causes your heart attack," the Daily Mail quoted Surgeon General Regina
Benjamin.
Yes, and that one lottery ticket could be millions.
We are not well served, not well informed when we get this kind of
misinformation from our public officials. It really dumbs down the
conversation."
|
This
commenter wasn't just any run-of-the-mill blue dog Democrat type
either. We clicked on the profile and found that he or she had 891
prior comments and 291
friends. Among the many breadcrumbs left by this opinionated individual
were
severe criticisms of Bush, McCain and the rightwing in general. There
was also a smattering of well thought-out points expressed that were
critical of the leftwings' casual dismissal of individual liberties.
We won't name this poster either, as finding out they're being quoted
on a pro-smoking website like ours could only serve to close their mind
up like a startled box turtle. It's rare that the millions of brainwashed
eyeballs drawn to Huffington's blog are exposed this kind of truth and
especially from one of their own.
It is doubtful that this person will ever vote for Mitt Romney or
whoever the Republicans end up nominating. Ron Paul? That's a different
story. This is the kind of Lefty who conceivably might
cross the line and help vote down a local or state anti-smoking ballot
initiative without sacrificing their Big (as in federal level) Vote. Converting these
voters is indeed worth the effort, and to reach out to them is a vital
part of crushing the Nanny State.
How easily we forget that once upon a time our
friends and neighbors who now unswervingly support the Democrat party
line once tooled around town sporting QUESTION AUTHORITY bumper
stickers on their unwashed Volvo station wagons. Housing rights,
employment rights and a progressive rather than a regressive tax
structure mattered to them. Isolating and then relentlessly bashing a
convenient
minority group wasn't exactly what you would expect from them.
And,
no, Arianna Huffington doesn't smoke. We needed a graphic
to spice up the article and took the low road of digitally modifying a
snapshot of the queen of altruist, left-leaning blog journalism. One of
the easiest tricks in
the book is to insert a cigarette and some whiffs of sidestream smoke
to the
picture. It's simply too hard to resist the temptation to take a
stalwart anti-smoker and put a burning cancer stick dangling James Dean
style
from their stiff upper lip.
Don't miss the next
article. It is a commentary on the unfolding events in North Africa and
a fledgling revolt taking place in Spain to a recently imposed smoking
ban there. Just tap the DOWN ARROW.
Spain Resisting Smoking
BanLET THE DOMINOES FALL
WHERE THEY MAY
Images of thrusting fists, angry
faces and smashed up cars, all caught herky-jerky smartphone verite
style, are seared into our consciousness lately. It started in Tunisia,
spread to Egypt and now is turning ugly in Libya. Egyptians were tired
of autocratic rule with no say in how the rules are made. It jogged my
memory bank back to a MSM report I recall watching about an Egyptian
smoking ban forced by decree upon the city of Alexandria by local
officials a few years ago.
Unlike the majority of
smoking ban reportage I see, this one featured a cabbie who was none
too pleased with the upcoming change. The usual drill is to interview a
few people on the street and magically everyone, smoker and non-smoker
alike, is thrilled to the bone with the ban. They might throw in a
wimpish retort to

make things look balanced, but
it inevitably ends with the interviewee deciding to quit the habit -
tomorrow, of course. Well, tomorrow never comes; very few people quit
despite all of the crowing by the prohibitionist lobby.
No,
this Egyptian taxi cab driver was genuinely angry and defiant. He said
he had no intention whatsoever of abiding by the new rules. If one of
his fares objected, he would simply direct them to roll down their
windows. I found it refreshing to watch. Now that they've shoved off
their old leadership I'll bet the smoking ban will cease to exist.
Forty percent of Egyptians smoke, mainly men but women also, and my
guess is that those who don't are far more tolerant than our
spoiled-boomer, nostril fanning culture is.
In Spain
an extensive and very unpopular smoking ban went into effect in
January. There was reportedly pressure from the new world order crowd
at the World Health Organization exerted upon the Spanish government to
condition any impending loan bailouts upon following through with
implementation of their infamous Framework Convention on Tobacco
Control (abbreviated WHO FCTC). Spain was a signatory country. Only
four Eastern Mediterranean countries are not on board with the FCTC and
one of
them is Tunisia.
Spain's economy is teetering on the
brink after a building boom gone bust. The last thing they need is for
their hospitality industry to go broke behind one of these
disastrous-to-business smoking bans. North of one-third of Spaniards
smoke, dine and drink coffee and wine at cafes there.
Many
Europeans vacation in Spain purposely to escape the drab, smokefree
eating and drinking establishments back home. This supplies the hard
currency reserves Spain is in dire need of. The WHO is playing chicken
with the ultimate fate of the Euro in order to satisfy their adamant
never-gonna-happen dream of a smokefree planet. Although they
occasionally fulfill a needed mission with infectious disease control,
the WHO should just get out of the lifestyle modification business
altogether. The planet is just too vast and varied for cookie-cutter
diet, drink and tobacco regulations to even begin to work.
Spain's
hotel entrepreneurs are resisting the ban and
Bravo is all I have
to say for them. I hope the government backs down from their foolish
stance and the WHO limps away licking its wounds. And much in the same
domino fashion of the North African resistance to ham-handed
authoritarian rule, I hope that Greece, the Netherlands, France and the
UK follow suit and resist and reverse their detested smoking bans.
If
you want to keep up with the latest happenings, tune into the
Banging on About
the Smoking Ban blog expertly authored by Frank Davis. He's a
veteran freedom tourist who has been vacationing in Spain for ten years.
A new political
community forms
Introducing
the Tobacco Lovers Community
If
you keep up with the alacritous musings over on the British
pro-freedom and anti-nanny blogs you've probably become familiar with a
frequent commentator by the name of Junican. Junican is a shrewd
problem solver who tends to think out of the box and likes to take
concrete, constructive action. Like the rest of us, he despises the
nanny state
and never tires of inventing novel ways to bring about its ultimate destruction.
He
left a comment on Leg-iron's
Underdogs
Bite Upwards blog the other day
that suggested that we smokers need to rebrand ourselves as the 'smoking
community' in the future and he's right on the money with this one.
Leg-iron was ad-libbing in his usual workmanlike fashion on the
concept of acceptability. The word obviously grates on him, much like
the word appropriate does. When anyone in the ruling class deems
anything unacceptable, as in smoking or eating an unapproved diet, it
overnight seems to take on the authority of an edict which is at once
both infallible and inviolable. We all know the drill by now.
A surefire way to come in from the wilderness of segregation and banishment and rejoin the family of man is to gain recognition as some sort of community. Communities often share similar foods, like Cheetos and juicy double cheeseburgers and bubbly soda pops. They quite often share common customs, like drinking in the sacred output of the tobacco plant. Communities often share political goals, namely their continued survival and the preservation of traditions.
Since
none of the four main pollsters seem capable of detecting just how we
smokervoters and the officially overweight tend to vote, it's up to us
to self-aggregate via the
blogosphere and word of mouth. It will be a lot easier on us if we
begin referring to one another as the Smoking Community or the
Free-Eating Community. It might even liberate the Gallup's into
counting our heads, as they could now do so without appearing to condone a
discouraged societal behavior in the process.
This
will, in turn, lead to our recognizing one another as fellow human
beings and upstanding citizens who need to band together in
common defense against an ongoing assault from a
healthist-scientific-government axis of sworn enemies out to eradicate
'our kind'. It is they and their old time, tent-preaching prohibitionist
mindset that
need to be shown the shortest route back to dustbin of history.
Politicians are naturally drawn to communities. A community is simply newspeak for the term demographic. For the past two decades they've been carefully distancing themselves from smokers while currying favor with the Latino Community. No candidate in their right mind wants to be painted with the broad brush of being a friend of Big Tobacco. But, standing up for the wants and aspirations of the Smoking Community and helping them come in from the shadows is a whole different enchilada.
Junican
further spun the term into the Tobacco Lovers Community with that
warm-fuzzy 'love' word thrown in to appeal to the sappy, altruistic
tendencies of the aging hippie baby-boomers. We could also work the
religion angle in. It would be wise to simply call tobacco a Mayan
ritual plant that we use to get closer to God. That's actually true if
you look into it in more detail.
At this point in
time we're portrayed as evil drug addicts killing ourselves
slowly and every one around us instantaneously (how does that work?)
with but one puff of toxic gray smoke from a plant obviously put on
earth by the devil himself. It's all the result of a concerted hate
campaign planned and orchestrated by a gold-digging bunch of
power-tripping people who simply don't like the smell of burning
tobacco and enjoy telling others what to do or not do.
By
rebranding into the TLC (
Tobacco
Lovers
Community - no
undefined acronyms are allowed on this site!) we can recruit slick
pinstriped lawyers to defend members of the community from being fired, from being
evicted and all the other goodies that come from group victimhood.
Churches in the form of taverns will spring up where we can congregate
and indulge in our holy sacramental wine and gold leaf tobacco
together. Why didn't we think of this before?
From
here on we are now a smoking community known as the TLC or Tobacco
Lovers Community. Now go forward and spread the term far and wide to
every corner of the earth. Use the term in your comments, use the term
in conversation, use the term in e-mails to your
representatives.
Just make sure to define this acronym with the full name first and don't
simply throw out TLC. Undefined acronyms and initialisms are surely the
reason for the demise of modern civilization.
Smoking
is hereby entirely acceptable and a thoroughly appropriate pursuit.
Read the next article down and learn just what the power of community status can involve. The Latino Community singlehandedly influenced the recent mid-term elections by voting as a unit. DO READ ON...
Coalition VotingLatino
Coalition Voting Saves Three Democrats from Defeat
If
you use any text editor other than perhaps Microsoft's Notepad, with
its many built-in limitations, it's fun to play around with
the Find and Replace feature in order to easily rewrite articles. This
little
word-changing expedition will hopefully serve as an object lesson for
those masochistic smokervoters and overweight voters who cast
ballots for the Democratic Party in the mid-term 2010 election.

Thanks
to your efforts we still have Democrat nannies Harry Reid and Barbara
Boxer in the Senate, and Jerry Brown at the helm at the capitol in
California.
This is from the Newshawksreviews
Original
text:
Latinos Saved Jerry Brown,
Michael Bennet, Barbara Boxer and Harry ReidBy
Ed Coghlan on Nov 5 2010
The
Republican electoral tsunami that swept the country slowed down
noticeably once it reached the Rocky Mountains and the West Coast. And
there appears to be a reason. A record breaking Latino voter turnout
probably saved Democratic U.S. Senate seats in Colorado, Nevada and
California.
First this original sentence:
"With
the exception of Florida, in states where exit polling data is
available, Democratic candidates won the Latino vote, usually by wide
margins. In California's senate race, Democrat Barbara Boxer won 66% of
the Latino vote while Republican Carly Fiorina won 31%. In California's
gubernatorial race, Democrat Jerry Brown won 63% of California's Latino
vote while Republican Meg Whitman won 34%. In Nevada, Latinos supported
Democrat Harry Reid over Republican Sharron Angle by a greater than
two-to-one margin -- 69% vs. 27%. Latino voters in Arizona, Nevada and
Texas similarly supported Democratic candidates over Republican
candidates in Senate and gubernatorial races."
Now
after a
few choice word substitutions that reflect the fact that nationally
smokers make up an even larger voting demographic than Latinos (20% vs.
9%),
we exchange Latinos with smokers and reverse engineer Democrats with
Republicans.
"With
the exception
of Florida, in states where exit polling data is available, Republican
candidates won the smoking community vote, usually by wide margins. In
California's senate race, Republican Carly Fiorina won 66% of the
smoking community vote while Democrat Barbara Boxer won 31%. In
California's
gubernatorial race, Republican Meg Whitman won 63% of California's
smoking vote while Democrat Jerry Brown won 34%. In Nevada, smoking
community voters supported Republican Sharron Angle over Democrat Harry
Reid by a
greater than two-to-one margin -- 69% vs. 27%. Smoking voters in
Arizona, Nevada and Texas similarly supported Republican candidates
over Democratic candidates in Senate and gubernatorial races."
What
a difference a word can make. What a difference your vote can make. We
need to steal a page from the Latino Community and start voting in
unison. Those two senate seats would haven given the Republicans 49
instead of the current 47 seats. The Democrats would be toothless,
clawless tigers if we'd captured those two races.
Carly
Fiorina, a cancer survivor, most likely wouldn't have been much of an
improvement over Barbara Boxer. But we're talking California here
folks, enough said. The same goes for Meg Whitman, but a Republican
veto threat, held over the heads of the worst state legislature on
earth, would have been preferable to what will now exist in California.
Barbara
Boxer has no business being a senator at all and particularly not a
California senator, a fact made all the more insulting to the natives
with her thick Bronx accent and all. She won with 5,218,441 votes to
Fiorina's 4,217,366. It is estimated that there are
5 million smokers in the state. A one-hundred percent turnout and a
similar party voting preference by the Smoking Community is a bit of a
pipe dream but a 65% turnout coupled with as little as a 60% Republican
slant to said votes would have turned it all around. Take 650,000 votes
out of Boxers column and add them to Fiorina's tally and it's back to
New Yawk with irritating little Barbie.
We've
said it over and over and over again here at smokervoter.com but it's
worth a least one more repeat. There are 46 million smoking voters in
this country. If 65% turn out to vote and 65% of those vote Republican,
that forms a net voting bloc almost 9 million strong. This mirrors the
strength of the much sought after Latino coalition almost exactly. We
form almost 20 million of the overall Republican electorate in the
process. We can't be ignored. Throw in the party faithful, the Taxed
Enough Already faction, and a few million fed-up overweight voters and
it is Sayonara time for the healthist themed Democrats and their
mollycoddling Nanny State.
http://www.independent.orgWho
Says There's No There There in Oakland.
If you've been to
this website before you'll note that the city of San Francisco, or
Frisco as we prefer to call it, comes in for a lot of well deserved
criticism. Frisco represents everything many Americans and indeed many
human beings in general simply detest; a complete lack of freedom to
choose how to live their daily lives and persistent interference by a
paternalistic government. San Fran is the capital of an area of 7.4
million of the least free-living people in the country.

It
should come as no surprise then that Frisco (oh how we love that term,
it irritates them to no end) votes Democrat on an extreme basis. San
Francisco has not voted more than 20% for a Republican presidential or
senatorial candidate since 1988. So much for individuality and
diversity of opinion, eh?
Against this backdrop you
gotta' wonder what it must be like to buck this trend and live and work
in the Bay Area while maintaining a libertarian philosophy. Well right
across from San Fran is the city of Oakland, home to the Independent
Institute, one of the greatest think tanks in America. Robert Higgs is
Senior Fellow in Political Economy for
The Independent Institute
and Editor of the Institutes quarterly journal
The Independent Review.
We like this guy immensely. He doesn't actually reside in the Bay Area
either, he knows better than that. You only go around once.
Here
are some excerpts from an article he penned January 10, 2011 by the
title
"Puritanism,
Paternalism, and Power" and subtitled Whiskey and
Gunpowder.
"Live
and let live" would appear to be a simple, sensible guide to social
life, but obviously many Americans reject this creed with a vengeance.
They find toleration so unpleasant that they support the imprisonment
of hundreds of thousands of individuals whose personal behavior they
regard as offensive. Why do so many Americans favor the use of coercive
sanctions to enforce repression? Perhaps the answer lies in our history
. . .
Puritanism
Politicians
and other patriotic posturers like to declare that the Europeans came
to America seeking freedom. The claim is at best a half-truth. In the
colonial era, most Europeans arrived in North America bound in some
form of indentured servitude, many of them children or convicts put out
to work. Disregarding such servants, one finds that the free colonists
sought mainly to improve their economic well-being.
To
be sure, some of them, including the early arrivals in Massachusetts,
were fleeing religious oppression, but the Pilgrim Fathers had
absolutely no intention of establishing a community in which
individuals would be free to behave according to the dictates of their
own consciences. The Puritans had already seen the light, and, by God,
they intended to use all necessary means to ensure that everybody
comply with Puritan standards. Far from free, their "City upon a Hill"
was a hard-handed theocracy.
For them, pleasure
seemed the devil's snare. Their vision of the good life was austere,
and they looked askance on the possibility that others might embrace
hedonism. In H.L. Mencken's famous characterization, Puritanism was
"the haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy." Moreover, if
the Puritans suspected that someone might be having fun, they had no
compunction about using government coercion to knock some sense into
the offender. Mencken might have had this proclivity in mind when he
observed, "Show me a
Puritan and I'll show you a son-of-a-bitch."
In
view of the Puritans' dispositions, it is unfortunate that they exerted
an immense and lasting influence of American social and political
affairs. Puritanism's "central themes recur in the related religious
communities of Quakers, Baptists, Presbyterians, Methodists, and a
whole range of evangelical Protestants, and Puritanism "established
what was arguably the central strand of American cultural life until
the twentieth century." Even today, ghosts of the Pilgrim Fathers haunt
the land.
Paternalism
Paternalists
are more ambitious than Puritans. Whereas the latter are content to
steer people away from sinful behavior, the former go further, seeking
also to promote the worldly health, safety, and welfare of their wards,
coercively if need be. Of course, paternalists direct their deepest
compassion toward saving children.
In the nineteenth
and early twentieth centuries, when American social life was more
rigidly hierarchical and dominated by WASPs, the paternalistic impulse
came naturally to those who took themselves to be the respectable class
in society. In their efforts to uplift the rabble, however, they
perceived a need to rid the poor wretches of their vices. Hence the
succession of campaigns against, among other things, drinking alcohol,
smoking cigarettes, and engaging in unseemly sexual activity, including
autoeroticism. A century ago, groups such as the Women's Christian
Temperance Society and the Anti-Saloon League enjoyed legions of
supporters. The Anti-Cigarette Movement campaigned vigorously,
especially against smoking by women and children; and the Social Purity
Movement, followed shortly after 1900 by the Social Hygiene Movement,
strove to stamp out pornography, prostitution, marital infidelity and
masturbation.
Government
Power
As the Eighteenth Amendment of
the U.S. Constitution (1919) reminds us, the better sorts did not
hesitate to employ government coercion to promote their rehabilitation
of society. They previously had saddled the nation with the Comstock
Act (1873), which forbade sending sexual information through the mail,
and the Mann Act (1910), which banned taking women across state lines
for immoral purposes. In many local jurisdictions, they had obtained
legal prohibitions of smoking by women and of commerce in liquor.
In
these and many other ways, the respectable campaigners shamelessly
combined Puritanism, paternalism, and government power. As David Wagner
succinctly expresses the matter in his recent book The New Temperance:
The American Obsession with Sin and Vice, "the Victorian and
Progressive Period movements were characterized by what scholarly
observers consider an exaggerated . . . notion of their ability to
change behavior, by a huge faith in government's ability to regulate
every aspect of private life, and by a strong ethnocentric belief in
the correctness of white, Protestant, middle-class social norms."
Respite and Calamity
In
1933, after a decade of gang warfare and growing disrespect for law,
Americans abandoned their "great experiment" and repealed the
Eighteenth Amendment. The homicide rate, which had risen by about 50
percent during the previous fifteen years, immediately began a secular
decline that continued until the 1960s. Mark Thompson, a careful
student of these events, concludes that "the repeal of Prohibition
appears to be the best explanation for the dramatic reversal in 1933
and the return to the long-run decline in crime rates" because
"alternative theories have a difficult time explaining the continuous
decrease in crime during the remainder of the 1930s."
Endless Crusades
Sisk
may be right, but I am inclined to think that no matter how horrible
the consequences, the desire to butt into other people's personal
affairs, employing the police and even the military as agents, is
deeply ingrained in the American national character. A Gallup poll
found that 85 percent of the respondents were opposed to legalizing
drugs and 87 percent were in favor of greater funding for drug police.
Search the Western world and you will find no other nation similarly
obsessed. Europeans, themselves no stranger to government intervention,
often view the United States as a nation of lunatics. Notwithstanding
forms and temporal fluctuations, the penchant for acting as
self-righteous busybodies has animated the bourgeoisie of this country
ever since Pilgrims set foot on Plymouth Rock in 1620. Because this
proclivity provides an irresistible opportunity for politicians to
promote their own interests at public expense, one must expect that we
Americans are doomed to an endless procession of costly, futile, and
destructive crusades."
This is some good
stuff here. In the future we will be highlighting a lot of the writing
and commentary from the Independent Institute. It's made all the better
by their geographic location right across from the heavily repressive
City by the Bay, as they can look out the window and see exactly what
it is they don't aspire to be.
And speaking of
bucking trends, if we smokers beat the typical turnout of 55% by
turning out at a 60% rate and then
reversed
the Bay Area's 80%-20% preponderance against Republicans, we would end
up a 16.6 million net voting bloc. What does that amount to? One in
four of the magic number of 66 million votes required to elect a GOP
President. That is what is known as a major league bargaining chip in
power politics.
If you simply can't wait for us to
post some more literary gems from this site, here is the link to it.
May we suggest using the search box and typing words such as obesity,
smoking, tobacco, sin taxes and such into it. Long may these people run.
http://www.independent.org
WORLD
HEALTH ORGANIZATION CLAIMS 600,000 PEOPLE DIE ANNUALLY FROM SECONDHAND
SMOKE
If
you noticed a shrill mechanical beeping noise in late November, its
source was likely the sound of millions of BS Meters
simultaneously going off as the Great Big Lie of 600,000 annual deaths
from second hand smoking made the rounds on the media circus medicine
show circuit. Newscasters from the big three major networks, still
practicing their decrepit one-way megaphone
communication business
model, stared right into the cameras and perpetrated the sinister
fallacy that smokers are wantonly killing innocent women and children
with their evil habit. It was feeding time for the hoop-jumping seals
perched in front of their beloved telescreens.
Diane
Sawyer was beside herself, breaking
into that strange weepy voice she gets, as she recited the World Health
Organization (W.H.O.) written script. The guy from CBS, young Jeff
what's-his-name, to his credit looked like he wasn't really buying what
he was saying. The Nanny Broadcasting Company, with anti-smoking PSA
Boy Brian Williams at the controls, spun the malarkey some more. The
barking seals who still rely on the three majors at truth feeding time,
gulped down their red herrings without even so much as chewing first.
But
a mega-popular conservative talk radio show host was having no part of
this BS notion. He labeled it as pure bunk. Back in 1998, the WHO
produced a paper which found no significant public health threat to
secondhand smoke and then proceeded to toss it away into the circular
file. Mr. Limbaugh's ace research team managed to retrieve it, ironed
out the wrinkles, and for years had it posted on the website for all to
see. It's lucky that his show has such high ratings and that he's not
legally constrained from challenging WHO's assertions. WHO doesn't mess
around with dissenting opinions; consumers, growers and producers are
not allowed any input to their findings of fact.

El
Rushbo
really gets worked up in to a lather over the secondhand smoking myth,
as well he should. He commented, only half-joking, that he remembers
(when restaurants and smoky bars were the norm) having to exit the
premises by stepping over the dead bodies of patrons sprawled out on
the floor in death throes from inhaling deadly tobacco fumes.
He
went on to thank smokers once again for bankrolling free childrens'
health care and got in a brilliant dig at a co-sponsor of the study,
the Bloomberg Philanthropies, by noting the rise of black market
cigarette sales in the Nanny Mayor's kingdom. Smokers, in turn, need to
thank Mr. Limbaugh as well for his many years of countering the wild
claims of Tobacco Control Inc. before an audience of 15 million
listeners. Scan the radio dial and listen hard to find any such
parallel from progressive political talk shows.
The
phantom fatal harm of second hand smoke is a keystone to WHO's
stratagem of shifting tobacco smoking from being viewed as a victimless
crime to an outright assault on the lives of impeccant non-smokers.
It's also why there are no smoking-friendly bars and restaurants, as
this
would supposedly subject employees to deadly working conditions. The
Occupational Safety and Health Administration and the Environmental
Protection Agency have made it impossible for anyone to even experiment
with a business plan that includes such a prospect.
Not
quite one generation ago smokers and non-smokers mingled everywhere and
anywhere on a regular basis. This study seems to suggest that all the
while, smokers were silently killing off their immediate family and
co-workers and everyone else around them.
Were
this to be believed we should be witnessing a huge upward spike in
deaths from heart disease and lower respiratory infections right about
now, as smoking peaked in the early 1970's and all of those innocent
by-standers should be overloading the body racks at the local morgues.
No such thing is taking place.
The health research
team from Sweden apparently outsourced the mathematical modeling to Al
Gore's first rate number-crunchers. They reportedly made use of a brand
new Microsoft Excel spreadsheet Function known as ETSfactor,

which auto-multiplies
everything by 100,000. Mayor Bloomberg's philanthropic pal Bill Gates
donated the Excel plug-in for free.
The ETSfactor
function also auto-excludes any confounding input data, like indoor
wood and animal dung fired cook stoves, from the calculations. Data
that might have explained why women composed 48% of the supposed
fatalities while men were only 26%. Especially from Africa and South
Asian households.
The optimistic smoker might look
at this as a pathetic last gasp of scary misinformation being pushed
out by a faltering neo-prohibitionist movement. The pessimist might see
this as the beginning of the Final Solution, wherein all tobacco
products are banned worldwide. The WHO is quite possibly the most
powerful supra-national governing entity on the planet.
The
study was funded in part by Bloomberg
Philanthropies, which manages the charitable giving of New York Nanny
Mayor Michael Bloomberg. He is founder and majority owner of Bloomberg
LP, the parent of Bloomberg News. Conflict of interest comes to mind.
While it should come as no surprise to any longer suffering New Yorker
paying around $13/pack, you might think his patronage would adversely
taint the conclusions. If
you exclude anyone connected with the tobacco industry from any
involvement, yet allow an anti-smoking extremist like Bloomberg to
influence the outcome of this scientific study, you've lost all
credibility.
Nobody in their right mind should take
this study seriously.
Here is the WHO report Limbaugh's team recovered, it's very hard to find: A special thanks
goes out to Marcus Aurelius of the excellent website Clearing The Air.
A link to this long standing freedom of choice web site is right under
the WHO report. Stay tuned for a full-scale review of this web site.
It's got very important information about some serious and feasible
solutions to the aforementioned smoker-friendly bar situation.
WHO
Secondhand Smoke ReportThe
Clearing The Air Website
One
Puff of Smoke Can Kill You
Progressives Lie
Progressively
The original draft of this piece now resides in the Recycle Bin. We
started off with a slightly ad hominem attack on the awkward, rather
unprofessional PBS Newshour interview segment between the Surgeon
General and Judy Woodruff in which it was proposed that even one slight
wisp of secondhand tobacco smoke was capable of causing a fatal heart
attack to the recipient on the spot. Stooping down to the gutter-level antics of Tobacco Control Inc. isn't worth the time.
To anyone who can read body language, Dr. Regina Benjamin's

delivery was embarrassingly amateurish. She came
across like a teen-ager lying to her mom (Judy Woodruff in this case).
She would sow a little white lie out of the corner of her mouth, and
then an odd smile would come over her face as if to say "Okay, since
you bought that one, here's the next one." She really didn't have much
fresh empty rhetoric to add to her "settled science" litany of there
being 7,000 chemicals in smoke fumes and the no safe level fallacy. Her
Janus-faced monologue progressively built up to the grande finale "New
Revelation" that just one puff of tobacco was enough to
immediately cause a heart attack, both to the mainstream inhaler or a
secondary recipient. The ever squinting Judy ate it all up and finished
the interview by thanking her guest for this fascinating new
information while commenting that she wasn't aware of this latest twist.
The best way to install a new operating system on a computer is to
reformat or wipe the hard drive clean. In this way, the old information
on the disk doesn't clash with the new. The tobacco-hating scientific
community seems intent on wiping out all cognitive recollection of
smoky clubs and restaurants still floating around in the collective
consciousness of millions upon millions of people born between
1930-1975. The Surgeon General's report absolutely beggars belief
to any rational person. Search through all the newspaper archives you
can get your hands on for a headline that reads "First-Time Bar Patron
Dies of Heart Attack from Inhaling Cigarette Smoke at Joe's Club" and
see what turns up.
The fact that our Surgeon General isn't a natural-born prevaricator
should actually come as a welcome sign. And Judy Woodruff was one of
the first Big Three MSM teleprompter-reading parrots to jump ship, out
of personal integrity concerns, from the pharma-sponsored
commercial media to Public Television. It's hard not to like Judy
Woodruff, she's such a sweetie. The same holds true when you look into
the Surgeon General's background. She is a genuinely nice person who
has had to put up with some cruel criticism of her big-boned chassis by
the very Healthist creeps she's now tasked with supporting because of
her job title. She's only the messenger and Judy is only the vehicle.
Dr. Benjamin doesn't truly believe what she said about instant
secondhand heart attacks and it showed. Even the thoroughly
indoctrinated "Wipfli Youth"*, those born after 1985, are likely to
have come away from this fractured media encounter with a grain or two
of skepticism as to its veracity.
The real evil-doers behind all of this slanderous and blatantly absurd
misinformation, designed to make Typhoid Mary's out of smokers, are the
lifestyle medicine doctors, scientists and researchers who cash
despoiled payroll checks drawn on the accounts of fake charities,
various university schools of public health and the likes of Bloomberg
Philanthropies.
*Of Heather Wipfli fame, one of the worlds foremost antismoking maniacs.
Exit PollsDon't
Give Smokers Any Bright Ideas
Rasmussen
Pollster: Do you smoke?
Yes
No
Rasmussen
Pollster: How did you vote?
Democrat
Republican
Other
Rasmussen
Pollster: Thank You very much.
Something
very big happened on Nov 2, 2010. The recently written-off-for-dead
Republican party came storming back into power and the exit pollsters
were right there outside of the polling places collecting their data
and painstakingly probing into the makeup of voters who brought about
this changing of the guard.
They
collected info on Latinos, women, Blacks, the youth vote and angry,
older suburban white men and women partial to Tea. Missing in action,
as
usual, was any questioning of the relatively large contingent of voters
whose personal preference is to consume tobacco products.

Billions
of dollars flow into fake scientific charities, as per the Master
Settlement
Agreement, in order to study the mating habits, the educational levels
and every other facet of life under the sun of we smokers. No one seems
interested in how we tend to vote.
Given that the
one and only Very Large Tax Increase that the ruling party and its
exalted leader actually foisted upon the citizenry was the SCHIP bill,
one might logically surmise that any organization interested in
political science would show at least an iota of curiosity by studying
the
reaction of these human beings to said tax increase.
Of
particular interest should have been measuring the backlash by under
$30K/Year smoking voters to an unprecedented 2,000% increase in bulk
tobacco
taxes brought about by the SCHIP vote. One might expect them to have
turned on their
perceived protectors, the Democratic party, in great numbers. It is
quite possible they did so, but we'll never know. It's not politically
correct to even ask anymore.
If you didn't know
better you might gather that someone, somewhere doesn't want 46 million
people to get any ideas about banding together in self defense in order
to vote out of office any party that vigorously lines up with their
sworn enemies - the fake charities who consume and dispense all of that
Master Settlement Agreement largesse.
Whadya' think?
Obama's
Post-Election Press Conference
If you don't smoke -
bully, bully for you - as a guy who sang wonderfully, smoked
constantly and lived to be 84 years old once vocalized. Now once again,
if
you don't smoke, you are incapable of understanding what
we're about to
say here. Obama sneaked into the little top secret smoking lounge,
located somewhere in the White House and away from the prying eyes of
the public, and smoked a couple of cigarettes just prior to his press
conference. How do we know? Believe it, we know. The President
was relaxed and fully in control of his thoughts at this press
conference and he shined like he used to shine before his wife clamped
down and made him quit.
We'll skip all the complex
neuro-chemical constructs at work here and just get down to the
nitty-gritty. No one who smokes really wants to quit. It's a pleasure
that is hard to define. Non-smokers find this hard to grasp, but it
does exist and to ignore it is to live in a fantasy world of perfect
little androids who all live forever on bouncing social security checks.
If
you smoke, you can readily detect when Obama has been on a long
cigarette drought. His eyes dart around, he hesitates in his answers,
he gropes for his words and he desperately seeks out the TelePrompter.
Similarly, on the campaign

circuit he flashes his highly partisan and angry rhetoric when he
hasn't had a smoke in two days. That's just the way it is with quitting
something you really enjoy doing and which affords you some blessed
relaxation from stress. And it's safe to say that Mr. Obama has
experienced more than his fair share of stress.
Maybe,
just maybe, we could all just grow up for a minute and allow the
President and John Boehner to get together in a room, break out
a pack of smokes, a presidential edition Bic lighter, and let
them talk and smoke to their hearts content. Lowered stress,
finely honed concentration and sharpened focus are all upshots of smoking
that the lifestyle preachers leave out of their tired old sermons.
What
is needed right now is to tell the psychopaths who compulsively see
everything in terms of 'Don't Smoke, don't smoke, don't smoke', to shut
the hell up and let these two grown men just talk without their
prearranged, double-dyed dockets in place. They have bonsaied
mankind with their magisterial cause celebre long enough.
Economics
is one part money and one part mass psychology. A compelling national
voice can positively affect the economy. Franklin Roosevelt, with his
showcase cigarette holder in full view, was such a voice. As was the inspiring optimist Ronald Reagan. We need for Obama to recapture his once-vaunted communication skills, which were in evidence at the post election news conference today. The economy is still in dire
straits. We're not saying that he should criss-cross the country with a
Marlboro hanging out his mouth. What we're saying is that Michelle
should back off for the sake of this country and just let the man smoke
if that's what he wants to do.
The Nicorette's are
just not working. It's strike three for Johnson & Johnson.
The Midterm Elections
Smokers
Revenge: Obama's Middle Class Tax Cut Betrayal
 |
| REMEMBER
THE SCHIP VOTE |
House
and Senate Contests
Dear fellow smokers: Remember the SCHIP vote. At the federal level the
party of the workingman really stuck it to you within months of their
sweeping 2008 victory. If you happen to roll your own, you've seen your
one pound bag of tobacco reduced in quality to a batch of horrid stems
and sticks. If you smoke tailormades you lost about $250 in purchasing power. And that's just at the national level.
The All Important State Races
State legislators have been very active during the past two years
dreaming up new ways to criminalize the legal activity of smoking. It
would certainly be nice if candidates would come right out and brag
about how hard they'd been on smokers lately. That way, those on the
receiving end could make up their minds on whether to retaliate at the
polls with their sacred votes. The truth is they wouldn't dare. They
know how to count and it would be foolhardy for any serious political
strategist to write off one in five potential disciples.
Don't
overlook those critical statehouse races; state senators and governors
have turned to taxing the sins of the few in lieu of the
pocketbooks of the many in order to shore up their
out-of-balance sheets while still holding onto their seats.
Buenos Dias Smokers: the Invisible Voting Bloc
Politicians bluntly court the Latino vote by going around and
unashamedly misspeaking "Bu-aye-nous Dee-yahs" from the podiums to show
how down with
'la causa' they are. Latinos are 16% of the population and about 9% of
likely voters. Smokers are 20% of the population and constitute an
equal amount (20%) of likely voters. So, why aren't these same
campaigners addressing crowds with proclamations like "Hello Smokers!
I'm on your side!"
The McLaughlin Group recently led off its broadcast with a
piece
on "Latino Poder", thus showing off their Spanish spelling
prowess
with the correct terminology for the word 'power'. Shortly thereafter a
big screen icon flashed with a 65% Democrat - 22% Republican breakout
of Hispanic voting preferences. One thing about John is that he does
fairly good research, so this tallying up is probably at least passably
accurate.
You can Google your heart out or Bing till it stings with the
terms
"Democrat"+"tobacco taxes" and the only possible conclusion you will
come to is that Democrats are not your friends if you happen to smoke.
By this token it would then seem to follow that smokers might be
expected to break down along a reversed ratio - 65% Republican -
22% Democrat.
Don't bother opening up the little turquoise calculator,
here's the
numbers out of a likely 25 million smokervoters: 16,250,000
for
the GOP and just 5,500,000 for the Dem's. That is almost 11 million net
votes, which is some serious political power for the beneficiary
party. What about the remaining 13% undecided? Go
ahead and
split that, it doesn't change the outcome - it's a wash.
In a very real sense, as smokers you've become the invisible
bloc, never
mentioned dare they ruffle your feathers somehow. The Democrats are
completely mum while out on the rubber chicken circuit when it comes to
hurting smokers with their past legislative efforts. No, it's after the
votes are in that the fangs come out.
Image is Everything
When November 2nd rolls around and the people have had their say by
selecting the best actor in a 30-second political sound bite,
the
midterm elections of 2010 will finally draw to a close. Everyone will
complain that this is the dirtiest election ever, but it's all actually
very par for the course. It's all about images, silly little images
that you're expected to take into the voting booth with you and then
react by placing your X next to the name of the candidate who left the
best mental impression.
We
can play this game too. Here's a few images
retrieved from
down the page and brought up front and center. We hope you'll print
them out and put up them up on the refrigerator with those cute little
magnets. Sear these thought pictures into your brain and carry them
into the polling booth, especially if you voted Democrat in 2008.
If you live in California, Nevada, Washington, Illinois,
Kentucky, or
Colorado and you smoke, your vote is especially crucial. The odds are
good that unabashed smoker John Boehner will soon replace Bay Area
control-freak Nancy Pelosi as Mr. Speaker of the House. Let's get the
Senate back while we're at it.
Here
are a few really prized scalps we'd like to see taken. Barbara Boxer in
California must go. Her snotty demeanor during the Senate hearings,
when she demanded to be addressed as Mrs. Senator should have
been enough for voters to toss her out of office. But what is
especially chafing to Californianos is her obvious East Coast accent.
What a complete insult to the west coast.
Getting Senate
Majority leader Harry Reid's seat would be simply marvelous. Voters in
Nevada, a state with one of the highest unemployment rates in the
nation, might want to think twice about electing a guy who would
further kill the tourist industry there by ushering in smokefree
casinos. He also carefully shepherded the SCHIP vote through the Senate.
In
Illinois it would be poetic justice to capture President Obama's old
senate seat. Reluctantly vote for Mark Kirk, as he voted FOR SCHIP and he is therefore a RINO. As a smoker himself, the President is
well aware of the latest form of fashionable bigotry being directed at
us by healthist doctors and junk scientists. He should have spoken out on this. He chose the low road and
there he'll forever travel in the eyes of 46 million Americans.
Despite their purposeful silence on the matter, the Democrats
are not
your friends if you happen to smoke. Politics is like slow motion
boxing. You've got to wait two years to deliver a counter punch to your opponent. Revenge
is mine say the smokervoters of America.
They
put Goebbels to shame with their efficiency.
The
great triad of public health, mass media and the Righteous of the world
really know how to spin all things tobacco to the robotic, computerized
plebes out there. A Yahoo News headline writer banged this
out on the
keyboard, told his crew to run with it, and here's what you got at
Yahoo: [Dateline: TOKYO]
"Japan smokers
happy to
inhale tax hike"
They must honestly believe that
rather than sharpening and focusing the thought process, smoking dulls
the minds of its 'victims'. Nothing could be further from the
truth. It would be nice to see the economic study that
produced a conclusion whereby any consumer, purchasing any product,
actually welcomed an increase in the cost.

It just doesn't
happen, except in the fever pitch fanaticism of the tobacco control
universe. Even those nicotine-deprived amongst us
don't buy
into this Bizarre New World proposition.
As you read
your way
through the article it gradually becomes clear that nowhere in the text
is there any real mention of anyone actually being happy with the price
increase
of 40%. As a matter of fact, the first guy they quote takes
the opposite track. That's the real world slipping through
the cracks of this illusionary brave new world imagined and spun by the
groupthink
factories.
"Look at me, I
won't quit," said
48-year-old businessman Toshiro Nakanishi holding a cigarette in one
hand and a coffee in the other during a break from work in Tokyo's
upscale Ginza shopping district. Source: Yahoo News
That
is a far cry
from saying you're happy with a huge tax increase. He goes on to
explain that this simply puts the price of a pack of cigarettes on par
with London. This seems to have been the yardstick the
government used to set the increase at 40%; to bring Japanese prices
more in line with the rest of the world. It is truly amazing
that any party in power, anywhere on earth would risk the wrath of the
voters in such a fashion. It is even more so when you
consider that fully one-third of
the population smokes in Japan.
In a world where
most
creatures exhibit instinctive self defense mechanisms, smokers are
expected to react oppositely and reward their attackers, (i.e.,
whichever
Japanese party is in power right now; they passed this tax), by patting
them on
the back and voting for them. This would seem to be the
pattern
in place, as
somebody
put these guys in charge in the last election,
when presumably the same one-third smoking/voting rate existed. This must change and change soon, like the very next
election cycle. Smokers must form a gang. A big
gang. They need to vote with 90%+ cohesion. They
need to duly note which party voted 'yea' and which voted 'nay' when
this vote went down.
The government of Japan owns
half the stock of JT, the largest tobacco company in the country also
known as Japan
Tobacco. It cashed in $29 billion yen ($354 million USD) in dividends last
year. Our federal, state and local governments effectively
own the tobacco firms here. They don't collect dividends,
they
simply take the income right off the top at the cash register, it comes
out of the bottom line of the private shareholders.
Furthermore,
in the Bizarre New World tobacco
corporation shareholders are supposed to take joy in lower year-on-year
sales figures. As per the terms of MSA, they're expected to
fund entities like the American Legacy Foundation, whose stated goal is
zero dollars in revenue for the firm. If a real world country
adopted
this macro economic model, they'd soon cease to exist.
At
the very bottom of
the article finally a tiny morsel of reference emerges which pretends
to back up the blaring lead off headline:
"But the
price increase is also helping smokers kick the habit. A recent opinion
poll found that 58 percent of respondents said they would give up after
Friday's rise."
A recent
poll indeed, apparently slapped
together on the very same day of this breaking story. An "insta-poll"
with about as much credibility as
a cup of instant coffee has to a java barista. Come now,
ladies
and gentlemen, does anyone in their right mind think that is going to
happen?
There's another problem. If six
out of ten smokers obediently set out to quit due to this tax increase,
that doesn't mean they would succeed; 85% don't.
That means
if
one thousand smokers suddenly chose to quit, roughly ninety would
follow through. The remaining 910 will 'happily' pay a lot
more for their cigarettes.
The topper was the
contention by the Japanese government that this wasn't about revenue
generation at all, it was about the public health of the nation.
Only
in the Bizarre New World of the Healthist Elite.
There's
no need to put up a link to this article, we pretty well
summarized it for you. Instead, while we're on the topic of Japan,
here's a link to what has to be one of the more affecting blog posts by
Frank Davis with the title
Two
Restaurants in Japan. It's
a fine piece of writing which sketches out some divergent modern
day ripostes to the old Zippy question "Are we having fun yet?"
Pay
special attention to the last two
paragraphs; they frame in what we've lost and what we stand to regain
if we're ever able to turn around this cheerless, stainless steel-on-Navajo
White world.
OK, Let's go back to the top of the page now
Underdogs Bite Upwards
LEG
IRON BANNED IN CALIFORNIA
There's
a beautiful old Spanish style building in town that is full of these
odd things called books (remember them?) made out of paper.
For
the most part, the most recent copyright dates on the inner jackets are
of 1990's vintage. Public libraries are the latest
casualties of the digital revolution.

There's
a room right
off to the side of the main
entrance with twenty or so computers that are hooked up to the
internet. It's a very nice gesture. Providing public access
to the internet for those unable to afford it is a vital part of
bridging the great digital divide.
For obvious
reasons, libraries need to be careful about screening out adult content
of the salacious kind from closely adjoining monitors. The
legal parameters which govern such content have already been defined
for us rather specifically. A renowned Supreme Court justice
summed it all up with the statement "I know it when I see it."
However, things get a bit trickier when you delve into
intellectual and political content, where it's best to err on the side
of freedom of expression. And that's especially true if you go around
the globe bragging and lecturing to everyone else about how free your
society
is.
For example,
you
might find yourself seated next to someone viewing an offensive website
exhorting its viewers to disrespect all humans who happen to smoke -
they've got every right to do so. Al Gore has every right in
the world to disseminate questionable scientific data on his
'inconvenient truth' page.
If you happen to delight
in
reading the Frank Davis blog "Banging on about the Smoking Ban" at this
California library, you're free to do so. It popped right up
on the screen. There was a great article entitled "Don't
Visit Britain" wherein he addressed the loyalty-sapping effect a
country sets in motion by downgrading the citizen stature
of its smokers. Tourism likewise suffers the same fate as NOT WELCOME
signs propagate in the form of hefty, larcenous fines imposed for smoking at parks and
beaches.
Vancouver, B.C. just did so. The city fathers there must be pretty
confident in the economy. They're gambling against a 33% drop in
visitors.
The next stop was a convenient link click away (by means of his bloglist off
to the right) to read up on the latest literary opus served up by the
wise and witty Leg Iron of
Underdogs
Bite Upwards fame.
That's when this happened:

In order to fit the screenshot
{Print Screen, it's on every keyboard} on this page, it's been reduced
in size. Down at the bottom is an abridged and truncated
little message enclosed in brackets which reads: [IP: 10.30.0.130
Group: adult]. Clear as mud, eh? They've just cut
you off from reading his site and that's the explanation. The
first part is the address of the library server computer and the last
part is the general reason for blocking this site: adult
content.
Huh? Leg Iron's page is adult content?
Adult, yes, as in not puerile.
Adult, yes, as opposed to the childlike cartoonish chintz
served up on a regular basis by websites like TobaccoFreeCA.
Adult, yes, like in possession of a fully

developed brain able to
discern crap from crapola. Ban him from the library computer
and you may as well ban Thomas Paine, who worked as a tobacconist
before emigrating to America and writing all that crazy stuff
about Rights and tolerance. Peddling the deadly golden
leaf and writing about individual liberty are surely both undeniable
grounds for winding up on the watchlist of the thought brokers, with
their delete switch primed to strike at the slightest hint of
resistance to consensus authority. Leg Iron's writing unveils
the bogus 'religion' of the Righteous in terms even a postmillennial
college grad can easily grasp. He writes in short
bursts of clean and concise logic. He doesn't seek to baffle
his audience, but he won't treat them like simpletons either.
You've got to chuckle, then think, and then chuckle some more. He's got
more common sense in his right brain than all the
collective cerebral mass at an antismoking
convention.
Ban everything by Albert Einstein while
you're at it, he smoked. That's a pipe you see in the
picture, you're not dreaming. The revisionist airbrush squad
hasn't managed to clean this picture up yet. Smoking his pipe
apparently helped him concentrate and focus on things quite nicely.
That is one of the well-noted effects of nicotine.
And didn't none other than William Shakespeare smoke a little
clay pipe? Better keep him off the library computer as well.
Leg
Iron's blog isn't solely about smoking, nor encouraging young, naifish
library-goers to take up a 'bad habit'. It's more about
shining a flashlight around inside that dark space right behind the
forehead that comprises the sniffy mindset of the Righteous, those rule-making
guardians of public health and safety. Without them, the premise goes,
there
would be nothing but total chaos, incivility and people dying before
reaching their eightieth birthday. Without
them, we'd all get along a whole lot better and we'd have more money
left to
spend on the things we really want to buy. Their fines and
sanctions for crimes against wellness distort
the
economy ruinously. It's
basically 'morality mill' socialism dressed up in virtuous, uniformed
drag.
The Righteous don't want you peering around
inside the murky recesses of their doom and gloom cranial cavities
with your damn bright flashlights. Stay out of there you
morbific, rabble-rousing little nihilists. Think
we can't dim your bulbs? Just try us, we control
the servers and you're just a node. Access denied.
Game over, Rover.
The Board of Public Internet
Access Control has apparently decided that, much as secondhand smoke
mythically transfers lung cancer around, a web page skeptical of
'accepted medical
fact' acts as a malignant opinion tumor. Such scientifically
seditious literature aids and abets in the spread of both cancerous
chemicals and
cognitions
and must therefore be contained at its potentially dangerous source.
Our
country has gone insane over the subject of smoking and we're about to
cross the line into becoming no different than some of the countries we
regularly criticize for blocking the internet from its citizens for
various and sundry reasons. Political correctness and
healthism now take precedence over common sense and freedom.
You can't read Leg Iron's blog at the library in California.
When it comes to smoking it appears Al Gore is right when he
states "the debate is over". Not one hateful antismoking site
was blocked.
California,
the Golden State that brought you surfing and beatniks and was
once considered open-minded, has now become a Police State and the
worst Nanny State imaginable. All of this over, as Leg Iron puts it so
blithely, 'a little bit of dried leaf in a paper tube'.
Wanna'
see what passes for 'adult content' at the library nowadays?
http://underdogsbiteupwards.blogspot.com
How to Leverage Your Vote
The
Incredible Potential Power of the 'Pariah Party'
Slightly over 135 million voters showed up and cast their votes in the
election of 2008. The turnout rate was larger than usual.
Typically a little more than half of the people (55%) who are
citizens and over 18 years of age and
not felons show up and cast votes for the candidates of their
choice, who in turn occasionally become felons themselves while in office.
WARNING: This article is going to contain a little realpolitik arithmetic and a few of those dreaded facts and figures and percentages that we are literally drowning in these days.
Ever since
USA
Today hit pay dirt by publishing charts and graphs and articles that led with X-percent of people think Y or do Z, it's
really gotten out of hand. With such a profusion of numbers and
percentages to recall and then authoritatively quote in your next
heated political discussion with Commie Pinko Peggy or Neanderthal
Nick, it's easy to get them mixed up. Was that
600,000 dead each year from secondhand smoking or was it 50,000 or was it just
5 ? [
Maybe,
5 at most]
Okay, let's get some of the basic facts out on the table to get started
here. We're going to round out everything to numbers ending
in either zero or five so as to make them more recall friendly.
Any blogger or MSM'er who bothers to include a

number to the right of the
percent point is wasting their precious time. Given all of
the numerical bunkum floating around, they'd be lucky if their readership
even approximately recollects the number to the left. Yet
they do it all the time. You'll still see stuff like "52.3% of the
65.2% of people who responded to our survey thought that...blah, blah, blah".
All right now, factoid numero uno is that there are about 215
million citizens of voting age in the country. Of those,
about 135 million showed up and voted in Barack Obama, a Democrat Senate and
a Democrat Congress, so much for the bad news.
This, of course, was a presidential election and they tend to have a higher turnout than mid-terms. Therein lies the crux of this little tome.
When
you
register and show up and vote in a mid-term election while
the other guy
doesn't, your vote gets leveraged. Between now and November,
on your way into the supermarket to buy your cigarettes, your soft drinks
or your Cheetos, you'll probably walk right past someone seated at a
little foldaway table attempting to register voters. If
you're not registered to vote as you read this, might we respectfully suggest
that you take the time to sit down and do the deed. And if
any of the three aforementioned items are in your shopping bag, there's all
the more reason to do so.
By the way, just to illustrate our point here, turn off your monitor for a second right now and see if you can recall how many people are eligible to vote and how many showed up in 2008.
See how you are. Even rounded to fives you forgot it was 215 million and 135 million respectively.
Here's the simple drill on how we're going to arrive at our numbers here, and
no they won't be within a margin of error +5 or -5. We intend
to break down three voting blocs here, all of them recently relegated to
official social pariah status by the Healthist Gestapo and their
parroting MSM trumpeters.
In order of their size, they consist of soft drink devotees,
the newly redefined obese and the smokers. First, we'll use some
kind of widely reported and semi-accurate percentage breakdown and then
we'll filter it down by the typical turnout of 55% and just go from
there. We guarantee you the numbers are startling.
Let's start with soda drinkers. Since we couldn't find any hard and fast
statistics, let's just all agree that almost everyone likes a
carbonated beverage now and then. Let's just assume for
arguments sake that 85% of people fall into this category. This may
amaze you, but that means that somewhere around 180 million of the voting
pool are Peppers or Mountain Dew'ers or, well - you get the drift.
If you apply a 55% turnout multiplier to this you wind up
with a nice round, easy-to-remember 100 million member voting bloc.
Stand back and contemplate a combined fuming mass, 100
million strong, teaming up and pushing back together against soda tax motions
hovering below the horizon, just past the visible spectrum of
dawns early light. Just take a wild guess at which party, mainly at
the state level, has begun quietly instituting soda taxes to save you from yourself.
The makeup of the next group, the so-called obese, is based on a highly
disputable multiplier floating around that declares that 65% of
Americans are in technical violation of the sacrosanct ideal BMI (Body
Mass Index). Keep in mind that when the paltering health and
wellness

authorities capriciously
lower the threshold to the Lance Armstrong (a virulent antismoking jerk) level, it's no surprise that they come up with that number. We'll use it nonetheless. Without boring you with the number crunching, it comes out to 75 million
voters.
That's 75 million people tired of being called out by Michelle Obama, and tired of being labeled a drain on the health care industry and just plain tired of being called fat by anyone. Once again this many people voting in unison against whichever party seeks to demonize them, or force behavioral modification on them as part of a preemptive wellness regimen meant to 'bend down the cost curve', could spell disaster for said party.
Finally we come to the fine folks
which this website has been seeking to galvanize since 2001, the
smokervoters. This figure is suspect and all over the place,
too. Given the ceaseless condemnation of their recreational
diversion, it's quite likely that some smokers decline to admit to partaking.
Does the commonly cited figure of 46 million include cigar
smokers, pipe smokers and hookah smokers? Nonetheless, for
the purposes of this article we'll go ahead and use this figure.
Based on the above-mentioned turnout calc of 55% that means
that there's 25 million likely smokervoters. That is a figure that
is easy to remember, so please, fellow smokervoters, try
committing it to memory.
Of course, this figure
doesn't square up with the purple-on-green caption directly under the trusty, ancient "I Smoke and I Vote" mascot (who is that guy anyway?)

who's graced this
page since it's inception. It boldly proclaims that 34
million people smoke and vote, so maybe it's high time we corrected it. Okay,
when Google changes the look of their familiar landing page, we'll
follow suit - until then, it stays. Incidentally, that number
represented 55% of the quite possibly
60 million people who actually may smoke, that is
if they were willing to admit it to Gallup or Rasmussen or
Nielsen.
And yes, the graphic is horrible and amateurish.
Hey, it was the best we could do with good old PaintShop Pro and besides that,
we can't afford PhotoShop because cigarette taxes have drained all of
our disposable income. So there.
The other
aspect that doesn't appear to square up at first glance is the sum of
200 million voters that we arrive at when you add all three up. There's
bound to be some overlap in these clusters. Some smokers also drink
soda pops. Some rotund folks might smoke. Hell, some rotund
non-smokers might even prefer organic carrot juice over fizzy pops.
You get the picture.
The point is this, we live in a democracy here. The general idea is that voters will tend to vote in their own self-interest and we'll end up with rule by the people in the process. A fly in the ointment develops when people decline to
exercise their vote, because registering is a bit of a hassle. Or when people
inexplicably vote against their own self-interest, as is the case every
time anyone who smokes votes for a Democrat. Likewise, soda
drinkers not thrilled with the prospect of forking out $16 for an icy
twelve-pack might want to think twice before voting for the so-called
Party of the Working Man. Anyone exceeding the rejiggered BMI
standard might not want to help elect the party that rammed through
ObamaCare, with its inevitable forced weight reduction regimens
contained in the fine print.
All of this could add up to a nightmare for the Democrats come November. We can't get rid of this vindictive, reformed ex-smoker president and his
health-hectoring wife until 2012, but the House of Representatives is
definitely in play and he'll be powerless if he loses the congress.
As an added bonus, if we three potentially mighty voting
blocs register and turnout in unusually high numbers, our power will be
magnified by the typical low turnout of those other voters who tend to
sit out the mid-terms.
Do stop at the foldout table
in front of the supermarket and register, do call your polling place and ask them when is the least crowded time to vote, and do vote in your own
self-interest. Let's get rid of this awful Nanny State.
Pass
it on. Share this page with a friend.
Turner
Classics: Smoking and Escaping the New Normal
These
are not the best of times. Economists are referring to the
term "the new normal" and tossing around time frames like decades
instead
of years while discussing our present financial predicament.
It's enough to make you want to just set

the channel to Turner Classics
and transport yourself back to the good old days for the entire
weekend. Luxuriate, if you will, in the perfect camera
angles, the thoughtful set decoration, and characters who
cooperate and
interact with one another sans the default self-importance of
today. As an added bonus to anyone who has had it up to here
with sterile Healthism, everyone smokes in the old movies.
Almost all of the conversation between the players starts with someone
offering up and then lighting a cigarette.
Smoking
was and still is a great conversation starter. There's
just
something about the cryptic, relaxing yet stimulating, qualities of
nicotine that gets people to crawl out of their little personal spaces
and talk to one another. If any of the prosaic, study-crazy
university sociological departments chose to do so, it's probable that
they would find a direct correlation between the decline in personal
relationships and cultural smoking acceptance.
Getting
wrapped up in a weekend full of Turner Classics

sure beats the pants
off of ingesting the Saturday morning newsfeed from the all-but-dead
mainstream media. The three major networks are on life
support. They've got nothing to talk about anymore except the
elemental subjects of food, shelter and clothing. They try in
vain to spin a fresh angle on it, but it's a hopeless cause.
It's pretty symbolic of how banal life has become when that's all there
is to talk about.
We all know the drill by
now. Eminently forgettable new host of the month comes on,
oversmiling, and TelePrompts (much like our new Prez) her way through
the upcoming interview on fatty foods. The exalted and
likewise forgettable guest is a dietitian who, after a hurried along
little onscreen factoid session, ends up telling us all to eat
our
vegetables. A dietitian is basically a person who needs to
get a real job.
After a smattering of pharmaceutical
commercials capped off with interminable hushed exit qualifiers, it's
back to the inaction. The next installment will invariably
highlight why it is all but impossible for you to sell your house, end
of story. Having dispensed with food and shelter, it's on to
the latest pair of shoes your kids are tugging at your sleeve to buy
for them. Another trifecta of frippery is in the
bag. It's a wonder the big three MSM networks still
exist. NBC, the originators of "The More You Know" moral
quickie segments, takes the cake as the worst. What does NBC
stand for anyway, the Nanny Broadcasting Corporation?
Just
in case food, shelter and clothing aren't thrilling enough for your
mental stimulation, they might throw in a short bit about the latest
trends in telephony - that game changing invention of Alexander Graham
Bell, who died in 1922 ! These are truly exciting times we
live in.
Don't despair, there's always those hula
hoops in-the-making, Facebook and Twitter.

The
antidote to all of this vacuity is to brew up a
bon vivant cup of
coffee especial, tear off the little gold cellophane leader on your
cigarette pack, engage the flintwheel on your silver lighter (Bacall
style) and relax behind a Turner Classic movie.
While
this may not be the healthiest nor the safest way to spend your
weekend, at least you won't die of boredom.
CAN'T
GET IT OUTTA' MY HEAD
Why
are some people so obsessive about smoking? If
you don't smoke,
bully bully for you, as the famous crooning smoker Frank Sinatra once
sang. Now go away, and get your nose out of

my damn
business. Really, even people who don't smoke have a natural
born
aversion to nosy, preachy jackasses. There was mention
recently
of a novel computer program that is supposed to help smokers
quit by
distracting them and tying up use of their hands for five
minutes, just long enough for them to forego enjoying a
smoke. The inventors of this program not only will meet with
utter
failure, but they've wasted a great deal of their time. What
kind
of sick obsession drives this kind of action?
Do
these nutters
have a life other than worrying into the wee hours of the night about
whether somebody, somewhere on this big, blue planet is smoking a
cigarette or toking up a cigar or tamping down a pipe load of Cherry
Blend. It's hard to believe that they're motivated by their
overwhelming love of humanity and their desire to save each and every
life they can. Nobody is really that selfless.
As
we've
noted in several previous articles, OCD plays a big role in their
psychosis. When they're not dwelling on your smoking, they're
busy counting how many times they passed through a doorway, or checking
their watch for the time every 15 seconds.

OCD seems to have become almost epidemic, probably as a result
of
our increasingly perfectionistic culture. You don't hear the
old
saying "Nobody's perfect" much anymore. It's as if we've
become
convinced that you can strike out 27 batters in a row at every outing
to the pitchers mound.
A good many of these creeps
are simply
your everyday control freaks. If you've ever had the misfortune of
spending any time around a control freak you know that they're a
despicable lot. Most people avoid them like the plague and
they
generally have no friends at all. Certain weak or sheepish
individuals get stuck dealing with these commanding bullheads at length, but anyone with any
dignity or strength usually ends up locking horns and then dispatching
them either violently or verbally.
Others who can't
seem to
shake the thought of anyone smoking are of the anecdotal
variety. They've lost a family member to lung cancer or maybe a popular kid in
junior high once blew smoke in their face and they never got over
it. Get over it is exactly what a stewing retentive needs to do to move on with life. They can jump up and down and tear their hair out by the
roots, but a fair amount of the world's inhabitants will keep right on
smoking
regardless of anything they say or do.
And finally a
substantial
portion of these grouchy trolls are simply haters with a free pass to
do so because in the mass hysteria spinning around tobacco usage, the
crowd has overlooked the obvious. Pay close attention to some
of the
vicious things that come out of their mouths, substitute other words
for
smoker,
and it all
becomes clear. If it weren't smokers they were going after it
would be someone else - like fat people, or ... you?
Michelle
Obama and the Nanny Broadcasting
Corporation are joining
forces to Save You from Yourselves.

She's back from Spain, just in
time to tape an important public service announcement with the fine
folks at NBC. If you watched "Meet the Press" this past
weekend, right after the credits rolled there she was, our First Lady,
unveiling the first mainstream media phase of her "Let's
Move" childhood obesity initiative.
Did you happen
to catch the First Lady's public service announcement on Sunday
immediately following NBC's Meet the Press show? As she
recited her message that warned that this generation of young
Americans, for the first time in recent history, faced a shortened
lifespan if they didn't change their eating habits, yet another media
gaffe began unfolding. As she spoke, her eyes were
unmistakably and noticeably twitching around. If you didn't
know better, you might have come away thinking that she was not
entirely convinced of the veracity of her scripted lines.
Once again the First Lady's handlers showed their ineptitude by not
having her record a do-over, this time with her sincerity
intact. Overall it was a dismal start to the MSM media blitz
stage of her Let's Move campaign directed against, for want of a kinder
term, the fat kids of America.

Okay! Take Two.
Can somebody please give her a sedative to curtail the jerky
eyeball thing?
With her husband's popularity sinking
faster than the original GNP estimates for the last quarter, Michelle
seemed to be bucking this trend of disaffection. That was
until her little jaunt to Spain, with 40 of her friends in
tow. To lessen the fallout she described the trip
as a brief respite before she girds up to fight for passage of the
legislative aspects of her childhood obesity crusade.
In
the past we've noted some of Michelle's prior gaffes here at
smokervoter. Like the time she chose the unfortunate term "I
hate smoking" in reference to her husbands predilection for
tobacco. Later on when she enjoyed an unprecedentedly long
guest segment on
Meet
the Press (you guessed it, on NBC) she let slip the term
"lifestyle overhaul", a choice of words sure to upset a sizable
cross-section of viewers not convinced of the wisdom of allowing the
federal government a franchise to intervene in such a
fashion. So what's next for the gaffemeister, will she let it
slip that she hates overeating? Does she hate Big Mac's and
non-organically grown vegetables too? She should also ditch
the ever-present glowering demeanor, as it's very unbecoming of an
non-elected health soothsayer to appear to be speaking down from on
high to the jaundiced masses below.
And don't even
get us started on the whole "The More You Know" concept.
These vignettes are so ill-conceived and vacuous that even
one of NBC's own, Conan O'Brien, used to tear them apart with laugh-riot
little parody sketches. In all likelihood, more people took
O'Brien's versions to heart than the real thing. However,
considering the first lady's penchant for behavior modification, the
teaming up comes as no surprise. They deserve one another.
Were
it not for her insistence on the President quitting cigarettes, we're
convinced we'd be a lot better off right now. Relinquishing
the calming/focusing properties of nicotine is frequently not worth the
tradeoff in presupposed health benefits. Both Obama and his
big government party's temporary ruling status have yielded nothing but
disappointment, bordering on false advertising, to the voters who put
them in charge of things. Perhaps the FTC should consider
filing charges.
His much vaunted
eloquence has evaporated into stilted, teleprompted passages that don't
inspire confidence, nor action, nor positive change. His
advertised non-partisan approach to problem solving has dissolved into
the atypical, snide, fund-raiser barbs the Dem's are ever so skilled
at. It is this snickering arrogance that obliterates them
every time. No one, other than a handful of staunch unionists
and government employees, ever quite gets their sarcastic jokes and
they never will. Soon it'll be back to history's dustbin
for them.
She's undone the presidency, she has a
tendency for the faux pas, and now she's coming after your overweight
kids. Do you really want her to overhaul your lifestyle?
The more you
really
know, the better off you'll be.
Generalissimo PractitionerA
Primer on Healthism
There's
a new 'ism' on the block. As a general rule 'ism's' aren't
good
things. Think Communism, Marxism, Fascism, Totalitarianism
and
think aneurysm. We are speaking here of Healthism, that repulsive
ideological bent that brings the word obesity to our attention every
ten seconds or so these days. Every internet portal, every
newscast, every talk show host leads with some story on what to eat and
what not to eat in more detail than any of us care to delve into
anymore. It's what drives the hand-wringing and needless
death
paranoia that defines daily life in the 21st century.
Obesity, smoking
and the deadly effervescent danger of soft drinks are all the
rage in our cowering, nail-biting civilization, while monumental
increases in life
expectancy achieved during the past century are all but ignored. These
are all examples of what
Healthism brings to the game.
Healthism sounds like
a good thing
on the surface of things. What could be wrong with any movement that
takes it name from that warm fuzzy, rosy-cheeked word
health?
After all, good physical health would seem to be in everyone's best
interest. And is it not true that a healthy nation is a
wealthy
and wise nation, just like Ben Franklin said? Well, it's not
such a
great thing if you go back a few generations in history and find that
Healthism has a creepy uncle related to a former health fad that was
known as
eugenics.
As you might expect,
there are the usual
assortment of heroes and villains. Like the united workers of
the
world and the vile capitalist pigs of Marxism, Healthism has its
pink-lunged BMI compliant physically fit and its rotund fast food
gorgers who smoke
like chimneys and glug down countless Pepsi colas. These
movements always have their enforcement squads and in this case it's a
combination of doctors and scientists and public health agencies
warding over the lifestyle choices considered unhealthy or even
un-American in the new perverted scheme of things. The health
police are on the prowl, checking ID's and setting up
roadblocks.
We recycled our old NYHP (New York Health Police) officer graphic from
a prior article down
the page featuring police chief Thomas Frieden and painted a
little Hitler mustache on him to illustrate. Why the upper
lip
embellishment, you ask? Are we finally playing the Hitler
card
here?
Aside
from a brief mention of the Austrian madman in
connection with yet another great article down the page (you really
ought to scroll down and read all the stuff we write, there are some
great gems to be found here) we've purposely laid off the Nazi imagery
because it seems a bit extreme to compare modern day health crusaders
to anything the Third Reich came up with. Pointing out
similarities to Hitler's manic aversion to smoking is just too easy.
But in truth, Healthism does share a
common thread with a nutty, old pseudoscience known as eugenics that
took hold and gained real traction in sync with the emergence of the
Third Reich in Germany. Uncle Adolph was a big fan of
eugenics
and it is said that he and Weimar Germany elevated it to new heights
from relative
obscurity by trumpeting its virtue and attracting money to the cause.
Adolph
Hitler, as a vegetarian, a non-drinker and a non-smoker
would have sat atop the pyramid of modern Healthism. It's
clear
he
would have wholeheartedly adopted its premises and
incorporated
it
into his master plan. If today's doctors, scientists and
public
health
officials are comfortable in his posthumous company, maybe it's time
for them to stand back and take a long look in the mirror.
Public
health
agencies, bored with their ordinary role of controlling outbreaks of
communicable disease and improving sanitation, are finding the
aphrodisiac of mass political power overpowering. Swabbing
floors
at the clinics can't compare with the power rush of telling people how they
must conduct their daily lives. A growing number of doctors
are
stepping up to the public soapbox to hector the masses on their
life-shortening wicked ways.
Der
Fuhrer vehemently hated smoking, as did the mad scientists and
doctors
who flocked to his side from the very get-go of Nazi
craziness.
He actually wanted to ban smoking within his war machine, but
his
military brass feared a mass mutiny if it were implemented.
Not
long
ago, our Pentagon commissioned and then wisely shelved a similar
Healthist-inspired proposal. Smoking on submarines is on the
way
out and Adolph surely applauds from his ashy, fiery grave.
Healthism,
with its stress on wellness as a patriotic duty and a chauvinistic goal
of culling the nation of derelict smokers and over-eaters, follows in
the wayward footsteps of its eugenics forerunner. Eugenics
received a big jump start via grants from big name corporate clients
like Rockefeller and Carnegie and the then rising star Hitler's
blessing. Derived of the massive MSA tobacco settlement and
the
sanctifying
power
push of a US
president by the name of Bill Clinton, stacks
of fresh working capital are building up in the vaults at the Bank of
Healthism. Like eugenics before it, big money
and big name politicians have made Healthism the monstrous battering
ram we see
today.
It's arrggh matey time for rapacious
gentleman pirate crews of buccaneer doctors and scientists as they comb
through rich treasure chests of sin tax booty
commandeered from the defenseless subjects of their phony health
claims.
With every pack of cigarettes you buy, you're tossing a few
doubloons their way as ransom. In actuality, it's more than
you're paying
the tobacco producers. And now soda taxes are right around
the corner.
Healthism
has proved to be a bonanza for the ivory tower elite.
So-called
bastions of infallible wisdom like Stanford, Yale, Harvard and
Princeton universities are jumping into the Healthist/
behavioral
eugenics craze with both feet, presenting their
first class
tickets to ride to the conductors of the Healthist Express.
Also
along for the ride are various public health agencies producing
corny, catchy PSA's they think are getting through to the stragglers
whose resistance they assume will ultimately prove futile. If you take
for granted that any message containing Brought to you by
the Department of Public Health at its baseline has automatic
credibility you might find this of interest:
| During
the Reich's early years, eugenicists across America welcomed Hitler's
plans as the logical fulfillment of their own decades of research and
effort. California eugenicists republished Nazi propaganda for American
consumption. They also arranged for Nazi scientific exhibits, such as
an August 1934 display at the L.A. County Museum, for the annual
meeting of the American Public Health Association. |
Healthism
creates layered hierarchies of varying citizen scorecard values to the
state, ordered by activities such as eating and
drinking and smoking. All of these are legal activities as of
this writing; let us hope that eating never becomes illegal or we've
crossed a line into utter social insanity. Currently diet and
tobacco consumption seem to top the frantic fixations
of Healthist enumerators in determining a fitness quotient to
be
assigned, but
other dangerous threats to the national wellness register may
lie just beyond the horizon. We humans do a lot of different things
and consume a lot of different things, so the sky is the limit for
Healthism's ominous reach. This isn't tinfoil hat
conjecturing,
although we almost wish it were. Check this out
from the
Healthist hall-of-famer Robert Woods Johnson Foundation. Der
Head
Healthist President Obama seems to have a real affinity for RWJF alumni
by the way. From a rwjfblogs.typepad.com section titled
Pioneering Ideas:
| At
RWJF, we've had a hand in one of the first major apps - the County
Heath Rankings - which plots community health characteristics - for
every county in America. Go to the site and you can find both
health outcome data, like premature death, and the social, behavioral
and environmental factors that lead to those outcomes, like obesity,
unemployment and air pollution. And you can see how each
county
ranks on any of those factors compared to other counties in your
state. And the County Health Rankings data has even spawned
an
irreverent take on the data - the County Sin Rankings - winner of the
Sunlight Labs Design for America contest for visualizing health data. |
Here's
a snapshot of the County Sin Ranking for Alaska's nanny town of
Anchorage. They twice voted in a bar/ restaurant
and
bingo parlor smoking ban, apparently in an effort to improve their
standing, with RWJF overlords, on the Healthist Leaders List.

Under
Healthism the body shifts from being
ones own temple to a state-owned physical asset balance sheet entry, to
be controlled and maximized for the highest return to the shareholders
of record - ObamaCare Inc, the pharmaceutical companies and University
Inc. Personal autonomy over the quality
versus quantity decisions of ones lifespan are delegated to secondary
status under this political ideology. It matters little to
your
new Healthist overlords whether you happen to enjoy smoking or love the
taste of Dr. Pepper or enjoy munching down on Big Mac's (supersize
those fries, will ya'). It's all about stretching your life
out
as long as possible and keeping the drug companies fat and sassy.
You can buckle down to the Healthists and live a dull boring
life
eating sprout sandwiches or you can pay through the nose in lifestyle
penalties. The effect on the average citizen is
roughly the same; that is, someone other than the sovereign owner of
the
temple calls the tune.
Just who is in
possession of the key to the front door of your corporeal temple is
what
is at stake here, folks. Will it be
you,
or will it be your big, all-knowing, all-seeing, government in
Washington DC (or the incumbent brainiacs enthroned at your state
capitol) that holds admittance ?
Eugenics was a
trendy false science that
viewed the racial superiority of certain peoples as
sacrosanct. In
the crazy world of eugenics only the genetically strong (the wellborn)
would breed;
the weak the unfit, and the infirm would then be selectively culled
from the gene pool and the nation. Healthism views certain
superior
behavioral
qualities
and wellness as sacrosanct, as the racial and genetic aspects
of eugenics would run afoul
of modern sensibilities. There's not much difference
between the words wellborn and wellness. The non-smoking,
alcohol and soft drink
abstaining citizen with a low daily caloric intake ranks at the apex of
The Worthy pyramid. The remainder of sinful, rugged
individualist
rebels and derelicts populate the base.
Healthism
and eugenics are
two different things. As rotten as it is, Healthism isn't
calling
for mass sterilizations just yet. There's dissenting end
games at
work with these two ism's. Eugenics seeks a smaller assemblage of
superhumans for the planet. Healthism just wants more people
living longer and longer and longer. It doesn't seem to have
a good
answer for how to finance the inverted pyramid it creates in the
process. The question is: what
happens when
the people want to choose 'none of the above' with both of these losing
propositions?
Most
contemporary people using 20/20 hindsight, make the assumption that if
they'd been there at the end of the Weimar Republic, they would have
been among the few that resisted the urge to hop aboard the nascent
Nazi
bandwagon. They don't draw any parallel between going along
with
smoking bans, national wellness campaigns or buying into Healthist
sloganeering. That was then, now is now, and never the twain
shall meet. War, a failing economy, and a sudden
decline in
global influence led to the German reaction and none of those are
applicable to the present situation. Right? And
out of fashion eugenics, give me a break. Weeding out the
obese,
the smokers and getting rid of soft drinks has got nothing to do with
it. It's just a function of bending the cost curve down for
National Healthcare and nothing more. This is just
knuckle-dragging Tea Party rhetoric. Just look who controls
the
legislative and executive branch. Exactly.
Doctors
need to get back to healing the sick one patient
at a time. They should also consider
stepping down from their public soapboxes. They could use
some
self-examination of their new roles lest they wind of like latter day
Mengele's. Scientists and educators as well could use some
introspection regarding their participation in advancing Healthism.
When
Barack Obama and the Democrats won the 2008 election, the passage of
their National Healthcare proposal became Job #1 with the White House
transition team. Several key members (William Corr and
Nancy-Ann
DeParle) of this team sported RWJF ties. They engineered a
Cabinet structure designed to add impetus to the Healthist Blitzkrieg.
Health and
Human
Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius says President Obama expects all
cabinet departments to leverage their resources in support of public
health, a move she suggested is unprecedented. "One
of the things that has happened in this administration, which I would
suggest has not really happened in the past, is that the president has
made it very clear to all of us at the cabinet level that while health
may be directly in the portfolio of Health and Human Services, he
expects all of the cabinet officers to spend some time figuring out
ways that we can leverage their assets and work on this issue," said
Sebelius in an April 8 speech on Capitol Hill. "Having
this multi-agency focus on these [health] initiatives I think is an
enormously important way to not only leverage our assets, but actually
to look at the whole community strategy, which I think is so very
important," she added.
|
You
might want to go ahead, do a little searching and read this article on Kathleen Sebelius and
decide for yourself where the current
administration stands on the Healthist Manifesto sweeping the nation.
Whether
Healthism survives or takes its rightful place in history alongside
another
discredited 'ism' that starts with a C (or an N, or an F) is up to you.
One of the two major parties seeking your vote this November
has
lined up squarely behind this modern quasi-eugenic movement and the
other voted 100% against ObamaCare.
If two-thirds of this nation's
smokervoters turn out this November, and two-thirds of these
vote for the party that has protected their vital interests over the
past two decades, the net size of such a voting bloc would amount to
10.3 million. That is enough to have overturned the outcome
of
the last election. Think about it.If you want to explore
California's connection to eugenics and Hitler:
http://www.waragainsttheweak.com/offSiteArchive/www.sfgate.com/Want
to check out Wikipedia's description of Healthism?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Healthism
In
an effort to demonstrate how timely and relevant we are here at
smokervoter.com, we're placing a prior article on Elena Kagan back at
the top of the heap for you to read.
If you happen
to be following her confirmation hearings on the idiot box, please take
note of her syrupy, self-congratulatory testimony detailing her
lifelong dedication to the downtrodden and demonized of the
world. You might take exception to this if you happen to
smoke.
As has become
de rigueur
policy from the Democratic Party, she makes a great big,
glaring exception from her otherwise beneficent beliefs when it comes
to smokers. We won't spoil the gist of the article for you,
but suffice it to say that as a smokervoter, you can thank her for
diminishing your disposable income and for making your life more
miserable.
McCarthyism
on the LeftPresident Obama has
nominated
Elena Kagan to fill the vacancy of John Paul Stevens and there's a
whispering campaign quietly developing that she is....
a "known" ex-smoker (as a
teenager) and current (?) occasional cigar aficionado For
heaven sake, that alone should be enough to torpedo this nomination
in light of the universally accepted stipulation that anyone who smokes
or has ever smoked is unqualified to do anything, including holding a
job, renting a place or even
existing
in 21st century America. She is definitely on the "list" of
people who have smoked for any suspicious Senate interrogator to dangle
in front of the cameras during the upcoming confirmation
hearings. How she'll survive this past cigarette smoking
acknowledgment is anyone's guess.
Check out this
little tidbit: "Liberals won't find much to object about,
although the far left may think she isn't sufficiently prone to
throwing firebombs. Her past as a smoker and her tendency to smoke a
cigar now and then may put them off, liberals being who they are."
Evidently
in their all-consuming hatred for human beings who smoke, the far Left
just can't get past this overwhelming hurdle. They run out of
compassion completely when the subject shifts to smoking. No
doubt they wish Obama could have found someone as liberal as Kagan, but
without this "forbidden foible". They will likely somehow
manage to hold their smug, little noses and vote her up though.
There's
a odd new twist on bygone cold war McCarthyism that's emerged from the
antismoking movement's War on Tobacco. On this go around the
perps are by and large of the L-word variety. The Democratic
party has lined up solidly behind a take-no-prisoners approach in
dealing with smokers. Tail Gunner Joe has been replaced with short and
snappy Henry Waxman, grilling tobacco executives and threatening all
manner of sanctions and restrictions on tobacco usage if they don't get
with the program. The frothing indignation is there, the
unassailable fact finding construct is there, and the adamantly
unforgiving fight-back-at-your-own-peril tone is there.
Some
smokervoters might feel encouraged by the fact the Ms Kagan has
actually partaken of the sublime leaf. As such it's possible
she won't approach her decisions with the mindset of a purist,
never-smoker

who finds even the thought of
baccy smoke totally disgusting and therefore not worthy of any
judicial temperance. As a former practitioner, she knows it
doesn't really stink, hell she even reportedly likes the cigars, which
represent the most odorous of tobacco delivery systems.
Alas,
before entertaining any optimistic thoughts along these lines here's
the big spoiler. She worked under the grand initiator and
chief architect of the war on tobacco, Bill Clinton. She
argued vociferously in favor of their whacky
cigarettes-as-a-prescription drug idea. She was an
instrumental player in the
Master
Settlement
Agreement, which
smokers indirectly paid for via an overnight doubling in the price of a
pack of cigarettes.
One thing that's rarely
mentioned but should be is Bill Clinton's awareness of the pass through
effect the MSA was sure to cause. He's commonly described as
possessing a high-ceilinged mind. He had Alan Greenspan and
Robert Rubin as economic advisers. There's just no way that
Clinton didn't foresee that the huge MSA payouts would eventually be
borne out entirely upon the backs of the nations smokers.
Publicly he played out the punish Big Tobacco ruse, but privately he
knew different. A general tax hike, affecting all taxpayers,
would have cost him the newly (as per Hillary) smoke-free White
House. Selectively sticking it to a handy minority cluster
of smokers made much more
horse sense.
This also marked a departure from the
longstanding Democratic party platform of defending minority group
rights. Not only were they no longer standing up for them,
they were now singling them out for special fiscal and social
maltreatment. In fact, the stacks of MSA cash that flowed
into tobacco research think tanks in turn fed a growing cadre of
singleminded (and generally left-leaning) opinion shapers who took to
smokers with a zeal that matched the post-WWII McCarthy commie-chasers
in both substance and style.
In the
course of this furious smear campaign upon sitting ducks, smoking
gradually went from an everyday pleasure and pastime to an un-American
activity silently ruining the country from within. Hard
working and patriotic tobacco farmers, simply carrying on the
traditional cultivation of a crop that saved our nation at it's
inception, were now portrayed as subversives. Like
heavy-smoking Edward R. Murrow (he smoked way too much), we smokers
know differently; it is they, the Dem-Nannies, who are dragging the
American way down into the pigsty of credulous groupthink and political
correctness. Until they're shown the exit by wised up voters, the great
Smoking Scare will continue running amok.
If any smoker's rights issues, such as
fair housing or employee rules, happen to wend their way to the high
court in the future, don't count on Ms Kagan to lend a sympathetic ear
to the proceedings. She's an
ex-smoker and a
hardcore
Democrat
first which translates, in the final wash, to the Joseph McCarthy
school of thought and approach to the subject. To the mindset
of the Left, smokers are the new Communists, threatening the national
security and well-being of the country with their nasty habit of
smoking Marlboro
Reds.
It's
not hard to imagine a staunchly anti-tobacconist hard-left Senator,
like Barbara Boxer (D)-CA, reciting this: "Ms Kagan, are you
now or have you ever been a smoker?".
Quit Driving Your CarCommodity
Hatred
People love to vent their pent up
hostilities. The world is full of annoyances that get under
everyones collar and sooner or later it's got to explode, and explode
it does, in those deplorable human traits of anger and
hatred. There was a time when you could simply hate someone
because of the color of their skin or the church they attended or even
just their chromosome count, but those days are long gone. So
what's there left to hate on? How about some commodities?

Commodities are just things.
Things that grow or things that simply exist. They don't
worship different gods and they don't wear skirts or leave the seat up
on the toilet. Here's a short list of commodities that, we
can all agree on, are ripe for venting on. Tobacco, corn,
pork bellies and oil.
Let's all get worked up over
tobacco - a little bit of dried leaf in a paper tube. Let's
storm the headquarters of the company that dares to mix corn syrup with
carbonated water, adds some flavoring and then has the audacity to sell
it to John Q. Public. And how dare those clown-suited crooks
cook up a patty of ground beef, slather it with ketchup and mayonnaise,
and park it between two rounded pieces of bread.
Now
we've got a new commodity to get riled up into a lather about -
Oil. Horrible, smelly, gooey, oil. It's officially
hate oil month now and don't forget to get furious with British
Petroleum while you're at it. You despise that oil don't
you? Of course, before the drilling rig exploded out in the
Gulf, you probably welcomed the fact that BP was bringing new
supply onto the market, thereby lowering the cost to fill up that car
that you love so much. Admit it, you love your car.
It develops a personality all its own. You wash it, you
pamper it with oil changes right on schedule. It gets you to
work on time. It delivers you to home-sweet-home at the end
of the day. Sometimes you'd swear the front grille is
actually smiling at you.
Although you probably
consider yourself to be an upstanding, responsible citizen who cares
about clean air and clean water, and you do your level best to live
green - you temporarily put these admirable intentions on hold as you
putter around the highways and byways spewing carbon monoxide in
your wake.
You turn on the boob tube and
there's Michelle Obama decrying the fact that childhood obesity is now
reaching epidemic levels and something must be done, lest a whole
generation of young people face an early demise. And you turn
to your spouse and crack a little joke about how easy it is to lose
weight - just stop putting so much food in your mouth. You
back your local school board to the hilt when it decides to
pull the Coke machines at your precious one's school. You've
bought into the secondhand smoke myth and even the third hand one and
you've got a simple, curt message for anyone who still doesn't get with the
program - just quit smoking and do it now, do it today - because you
said so.
Okay - no problem - no sooner said than
done - as long as you say so - Mr. and Mrs. Perfect. Now
might we ask just one favor of you in return, one that's got everything
to do with the waddling lubricated pelicans in Louisiana.
Would you please just stop driving your car? Hey,
it's just as effortless as quitting smoking and eating less. Buy
a bicycle or walk to work or invest in a horse if you've got to, but
stop it with the oil. Join up with those of us who totally
hate that evil slippery commodity, and BP and the harm done to the children
emanating from that nasty secondhand CO trailing cloud of
yours. Quit driving your car. Please. Do
it for the children.
Rand
Paul wins in Kentucky Republican primary for Jim Bunning's Senate Seat.

With
considerable Tea Party support Rand Paul, the son of Ron Paul, the
noted libertarian leaning Republican congressman from Texas, just waxed
his
opponent in Kentucky. Way to go Kentucky. They grow
great tobacco in Kentucky.
This fine southern state
is
known for bourbon and whiskey distilling, tobacco, horse racing, and
college
basketball. Let's see now, that's drinking, smoking and
betting, hardly what you might call a Puritan's paradise.
Sounds like
our kind of place. It is the second largest tobacco producing
state, second only to North Carolina.
Kentucky
voters are a
hard lot to figure out. They register Democrat but frequently
vote in
Republicans. Both of their current Senators are
Republican.
They also had a steady track record of picking the eventual
presidential winners in every election between 1964 and 2004.
When they went 57-41 for McCain in 2008, the streak came to an end.
The
mainstream insta-pundits were downplaying the strength of the Tea Party
movement not that long ago. They estimated the new alignment
to comprise about 18% of the electorate, enough to register on the
radar
screen but, not enough to really effect things one way or the
other. Wisecracking Democrat pols added their usual ad
hominem criticisms to the mix and anyone who banks on MSM conclusions
probably
completely wrote them off.
You never hear much from
the Tea Party movement about the war on tobacco. Their main
focus is
smaller government, fiscal responsibility and personal freedom, but not
so much about what's been going on with smokers for the past twenty
years. That's understandable, as four out of five people no
longer smoke. They should take into account the fact that the
loss
of freedom can be contagious. It seems likely that a goodly
number of Tea Partiers would be a trifle perturbed with suddenly
finding their
soda pops doubled in price due to a new tax.
Since
we're about
30 million irate voters in search of the perfect party to connect with,
how about
some Tea and Cigarettes? That's kind of like the British
version of coffee and cigarettes, which is truly one of life's most
gratifying
combinations. It just so happens that there's a British blog
on Frank Davis's sidebar of links by the name of
Tea and Cigarettes.
The
blogs author, Pat Nurse, is a freelance writer and her user profile
contains this tidbit "I rant about the nanny state, the smoking ban,
and the constant assault on our lifestyle habits by powerful lobby
groups. Their "concerns" are eroding personal freedom further at a time
when civil liberties are already under grave threat." This
sounds promising and it's becoming an increasingly familiar theme,
too.
Go check out her blog and take note of the fact that she weighs in on
the UKIP party and the smoking bans in Britain. The more we
learn about the UKIP the better they sound. Maybe we need a
UKIP
here, then again maybe we've got one already. Rand Paul would
fit
into the UKIP pretty well.
The two Republican
stalwarts
taking different sides of this primary were Sarah Palin and Mitch
McConnell
both of whom we like, so we'll just stay out of that aspect.
We want to win, that is all, we want to win. We're not seeking second
place here folks, we want the Nanny State to come tumbling
down.
It's looking more doable all the time.
Rand Paul is
former Libertarian presidential candidate and currently Texas
Republican
congressman Ron Paul's son. He overwhelmed his opponent, Trey
Grayson, garnering an almost mandate-level 60% share of the
vote.
Now it's on to November and hopefully a victory over his Democratic
opponent, Jack Conway. There's an article on the harshly
antismoking web site Stop Smoking Way that fawns all over Conway, so
it's pretty clear where he is coming from. But, what else
would you expect from a Democrat in the first place. It
is
abundantly clear that as an institution they are the American smokers
sworn enemy, so we won't belabor that point any further for the
purposes of this article. There'll be a link to the article
at the conclusion of this piece.
While you might
think
of Sarah Palin as a natural born libertarian, and we'll admit it
appears that's
what she really is deep down inside, parts of her home state of Alaska
have exhibited some disturbing freedom-stifling personality
traits. Anchorage is a nanny town. This comes as a
complete surprise, as you might think of Alaska as being one of the
freer states
of the republic. They voted in a bar smoking ban there and
later on, after a young libertarian fellow gave a shot at repealing it,
they
voted to keep it intact. Then again Anchorage is urban Alaska
and urbanites
have a pronounced nanny tendency. New York, Los Angeles and
Seattle
are all puritan paradises full of uptight people and annoying rules and
regulations. Rather than go into any great detail here, we'll
opt for including a link at the conclusion of this article which
fleshes
this out more in greater detail.
In general though,
the Tea Party is a good thing for the body politic of this
country. Its major themes of
smaller government, lower taxes and an end to creeping government
intrusion certainly dovetail with the tripartite stand this web site
stands for: the mitigation of smoker bashing, no soda taxes, and an end
to the contemptuous new obesity crusade.
Like it or
not, America operates on a two-party system and you've got to choose
between one or
the other of the main parties if you want your vote to impact
anything.
The generally accepted faces of the Republican party at this juncture
are
Rush Limbaugh and John Boehner. Rush likes cigars and has had
our backs for a long, long time with his super-popular radio
show. He pounced on the hypocrisy and big lies of the tobacco
temperance crowd as far back as the 1998 MSA strong-arming by Clinton
et al.

John
Boehner himself smokes and makes no bones, nor apologies, about
it. He would be the natural choice of the frustrated American
smokervoter. As of this writing he's made no moves toward
running for president in 2012, but that could change.
On
the
other hand the Democrats have produced Ted Kennedy, Bill Clinton, Henry
Waxman, Al
Gore and our current reformed antismoking President Obama as the dour
faces of their party. Gore's global warming farce is like the
antismoking crusade carried to its outer limits; he wants the planet
itself, as an entity, to cease smoking. Fat chance of that,
Al, unless you want to ban and overturn the laws of mechanical motion
and
physics somehow.
Since it is obvious we as smokers
are
better served hitched up with the Republican party, it is now incumbent
upon us to
hold its feet to the fire and insist upon it incorporating some
libertarian values into its basic platform.
Luckily, Republicans are genetically predisposed to the idea of
transcendent
freedom for the individual on the whole, whereas Democrats find it
repugnant to their ultra-statist stance.
And
then I go and spoil it all by saying something stupid like....
As
a media manipulation greenhorn, Rand Paul really tripped out of the
starting blocks during a ill thought out interview with Rachel
Maddox. Maddox is a snide, smug lefty tv
journalist. She's
the comedian who tells a joke to a packed house and gets maybe three
loud boisterous laughs while the rest of the room sits in silence
wondering what the joke was. His response to a 'gotcha' setup
question regarding the 1964 Civil Rights Act was disappointing to say
the very
least. He later explained that he would have voted for it,
but the damage had already set in and we truly hope he doesn't really
have
a problem with it. As all smokers are well aware of,
discrimination and segregation is a painful and unjust experience.
Smokers
come in all colors, all religions and all genders. If
anything the
trending new discrimination foisted upon them from the likes of the
Maddox crowd has united, for the first time in recent memory, these
various parts of the whole. It is a legal activity, rather
than any of the three aforementioned factors, that is the focus of this
iniquity. The bar owner has lost to right to choose whether
or not smoking is to be allowed on the premises in her or his
establishment. It is precisely this kind of
overstepping by the government that has created movements like the Tea
Party.
A sign at the tavern entrance informing
non-smokers that they could easily avoid exposure
to tobacco smoke by not entering would have been a simple enough
solution. The power of the marketplace might have spawned
bars that chose to operate a smoke-free atmosphere in order to attract
this
customer base. No one in their right mind would suggest that excluding
anyone based on ethnicity has any place in this debate. We're
talking an activity here - a legal activity.
Even
in-between solutions, such as ventilation measures which could have
satisfied both
camps are precluded by the current crop of laws regulating
bars.
The secondhand smoke fallacy is used to justify these blanket bans, but
the main attraction of a bar, alcohol, yet another activity, is
incongruously given a pass. The oxymoron of an alcohol-free
bar is rather obvious to everyone. Everyone, that is except
for
those who have an implacable trust in the government's wisdom to step
in and
supplant private choice in all matters. Design by committee
from upon high takes ultimate precedence in their riskless, safe
universe.

The
brilliant professor Walter E. Williams, filling in for Rush Limbaugh,
weighed in on Paul's media blunder and clarified in greater detail what
was really said and what was disseminated for easy and quick digestion
by MSNBC, an affiliate of those fine folks who bring you the
nauseating "The More You Know" PSA's. See our little Brian
Williams graphic from the Nancy-Ann DeParle article further down the
page to see what we think of this worthless NBC product of the
times. It goes way beyond stupidity. Dr. Williams
warned listeners that tyranny knows no bounds. He spoke of
the
current Obama wave towards controlling salt content and it's similarity
to the
mission creep of the antitobacco drive.
Dr. Williams
is an economics professor at George Mason University and a
self-described
"Madisonian liberal". He brilliantly and adamantly expounds
the moral superiority of liberty and it's counterpart in limited
government. He speaks emphatically of the medical community's newfound
disposition towards forcing their advice upon those who don't want
it. If you happen to count yourself among the crusaders for
this healthist movement, you don't want to debate Dr. Williams, you
will be
devastated by his crystal clear, and totally sound logic.
As
a matter of fact, a dream ticket for freedom-loving voters in 2012
might
consist of either Ron Paul/Walter Williams or
Williams/Boehner.
Although Williams initially stated that he wouldn't completely rule out
the possibility of running for president in 2008, he ultimately decided
against such a run, and endorsed Ron Paul.
Although
hypotheticals are generally worth the air they're floated on,
the outcome of election 2008 would certainly have
been interesting affair had Ron Paul and Walter Williams replaced the
McCain/Palin ticket. Two groups of voters that turned out
heavily for Obama could have swung quite differently with these two in
the chase.
At this point in time, Rand Paul is ahead
of Conway in the polls. Let's hope
this trend holds up come November. Despite these two early
gaffes,
he's got the right idea and we surely hope he defeats Conway.
If you smoke or like Pepsi's or love to eat nice, juicy hamburgers to
your
hearts content, register to vote and show up in November.
When
Rand Paul takes his seat in the Senate, the cause of liberty and
personal choice will have gained a clear new voice in a chamber that
was hijacked by a pack of sanctimonious, hard-necked Salem witchhunters
in the election of 2008.
While we're on the topic of
the bluegrass state of Kentucky did we mention that there's a terrific
new
smoking website from there that goes by the name of
BaccyTown
All in all, this is a site with a very professional look and feel to
it. It's very ably run by DougE and his crew. Their
motto is "One plant, one tribe, from many kinds, forms and places, all
uniting."
Along the lines of this theme Doug penned
an article entitled "How have we allowed this to happen?" which tackles
the pipe vs cigar vs cigarette chasm that can divide smokers into petty
little warring camps. These are the kind of imbroglios that
Obama's game planner David Axelrod can only dream of. It gets
us nowhere. It splits our vote into the worst of all possible
scenarios - a washout. Good for Doug for opening this can of
worms that certainly needed opening.
There are
plenty of forums on BaccyTown and a news feed that helps keep smokervoters up to date on
the latest assaults on their rights and freedoms. The forums
tend toward the discussion of tobacco quality issues over the politics
of
smoking, but that's our particular niche anyhow. The forums
are well cordoned off from each other so if specificity is what your
seeking, you can slide right into the conversation of your current fancy
with ease.
As mentioned earlier with Kentucky being
the second largest tobacco producing state,
there is a very informative Glossaries section on terminology that is
worth checking into. The different means of farming, curing
and
processing tobacco are defined as are the many different varieties of
the actual plant.
Take
a cruise over to BaccyTown and join up today. There aren't
enough pro-smoking sites out there to start with, especially when
compared to
the legions of boring, predictable antismoking sites that litter the
net, so we welcome Bob, Dave, DougE and Shar to the fray.
In
typical smokervoter fashion, now that you've read our words of
profundity
without the vexing interruption of link clicking interludes to distract
and
waylay your train of thought, here are the pledged links.
Here's
Stop Smoking Way fawning over Rand Paul's opponent, Jack
Conrad:
http://www.stopsmokingway.com/kentucky-works-to-stop-teen-smoking.htmHere's
the "Tea and Cigarettes" blog:
http://patnurseblog.blogspot.comHere's
why Anchorage, Alaska isn't very Libertarian, nor much fun if you like to
smoke:
http://www.smokersclubinc.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=4244And
be sure and check out
BaccyTown
Our Dumb Yankee Post
Election Analysis
Handicapping
the 2010 British Election
The
polls closed at 10 PM on Thursday and the UK Election of 2010 went into
the history books. The result was a hung parliament, which to our
hayseed Yankee mentality means "huh?" what's that mean? If
you thought our Electoral College system was perplexing, try
solving the jigsaw puzzle of coalition rule if you fancy being dazed and confused. There's plenty of intrigue and power drama at play right now in sorting out the grand question of just who won. We haven't had an exciting election, save for the Gore-Bush deadlock debacle, since Ross Perot shook things up twenty years ago. From the perspective of the American smokervoter, we'd be a lot better off here if the Republicans and Democrats were consigned to fighting over the scraps left over from a Libertarian party majority showing.
As you might have
noticed over the past year, we have become big time fans of two particular British pro-smoking
bloggers. They're Frank Davis with his "Banging on
about the Smoking Ban" and the venerable Leg-Iron with his "Underdogs Bite
Upwards" contribution. Truthfully, despite the fact that we
emanate from the USA, these two overseas blogs have become our first stops on
the daily online routine of checking out what's shaking with the
politics of smoking, personal freedom and our never ending battle with
the insidious Nanny State.
Following these two blogs
has served as a wake up call to the fact that the persistent tobacco temperance crusade, like rust, never sleeps and is now a worldwide corrosive curse. What happens in England or Scotland effects us here
and vice-versa. We're all in this battle together now, the health
nags and the food police nannies have seen to this; we thank them for
their galvanizing chest shoves. We'll all eventually rid
ourselves of the Righteous, as self-preservation is a powerful human force and we're
certain it's what will eventually drive us to win out in the
end.
Smokers, the BMI violators, and the free-willed of the world will
coagulate into the majority. From what we take away from what
just took place in the UK elections, it wasn't a good day for smokervoters. We had high hopes.
As
is the usual drill around here, we'll put links up to both of these
great blogs at the end of this article so that you can read their
eminently more learned and informed distillations on what really took
place. In the meantime, here is our 5,000 mile distant and
completely amateur poli-sci 'reflection on the election'.
We
were rather naively hoping that there would be a huge groundswell of
support and votes for a party known as the UKIP.
UKIP
stands for the United Kingdom Independence Party. According to wikipedia
(which is not
the end all and be all it's sometimes cracked up to be) they're a
Conservative and
Populist party. What's not to like about
that? It certainly worked for Ronald Reagan. They want to keep Great
Britain out of the European Union and national sovereignty is paramount
to their basic platform. Again, what's not to like about
that?
But above all, they're apparently the sole political party with the
intestinal fortitude to actually reach out and touch the newly
untouchable smokers of the UK. They're open to allowing pubs
the right to decide whether to allow smoking on the premises and for this
we salute them. In the new reality of Nicotine Nazism that's
got the body politic of the world goose-stepping to the diktats of the
antismoking SS, that takes a lot of guts.
Under our
best case scenario, the emerging DIY network (we'll link to it) that
Frank Davis articulately described in one of his earliest posts was
going to succeed in getting at least 60% of what we calculate as
roughly 9,500,000 likely UK smokervoters to vote UKIP. Our
amateur poli-sci election arithmetic went thusly: Based on
the last couple of elections, turnout is about 63% there, which is way
better than our 55% average. There are about 15 million
smokers in the UK, therefor: 63% of 15 million is how we arrive at 9.5
million. If 60% of those (which is the unofficial definition
of a mandate) had voted UKIP they would have garnered 5,700,000
votes.
When you take into consideration that the "victorious" Conservatives
ended up with 10.7 million, that's no small potatoes. It
seems to us that this would have put them squarely in the king maker
seat.
But alas, that's not what happened. Their vote total did
increase by 50%, but all told they got around 1 million votes. It
sounds like life for the smokers of the UK will continue to be pretty
dreadful. Pubs will continue to close. The
antismokers will continue the Big Lie and score scoundrelly victories against personal
freedom. The Nanny's win another round - for now.
We'll
admit it; we got caught up in our own little 'preaching to the choir'
syndrome. It's easy to do when you start clicking on the
links of their blog rolls and read all of the clever and illuminating comments
therein. They're inspiring and invigorating and intoxicating
and you can easily forget that there is still a lot of sheeple and
Righteous out there to contend with, and a lot of them vote.
To
further complicate things, when we searched to find out just how many
votes they got (which was like pulling teeth - epic fail for all of the
search engines out there) we came across lots of Tory comments that
blamed the UKIP for denying them a majority. This sounded a
little bit like some Democrat's contention that Ralph Nader cost Al
Gore the 2000 election. (We, by the way, encourage die hard
Progressives who smoke to vote for Ralph Nader. Anything to
thwart the Democrats, anything. They are the sworn enemy of
the American smokervoter). We however tend to side with those who
opined that if the Conservatives had made a deal with the UKIP to
loosen up on smokers and pub rules and allow a referendum on the Lisbon
Treaty ***, it would have given them the majority. We intend
to advance this idea of 'libertarianizing' the Republicans right here in
the good, old USA in the coming months. You've got to wonder
what would have happened to the youth vote if the 2008 contest had pitted
Obama versus former Libertarian Ron Paul as the Republican candidate
instead of John McCain. In a hopeful sign for the future, he
was very
popular with college kids.
Here
are some tidbits from Frank Davis and Leg Iron's day-after analysis and
a few comments we'd like to respectfully throw in the mix.
Frank
spoke of how the Conservatives watered down their platform to come
across as more liberal in order to attract fence-leaners. Who
really wants a progressive Republican (cough, cough - $1.50/Pack Tax
John McCain) or a conservative Democrat
anyway. With the Dem's you would end up with a party that
bans smoking and fast food and soft drinks and abortion.
We
especially liked his take on Progressives. What
is progressive about closing pubs with phalangist smoking bans while
driving people apart who used to be friends? To which we might
add:
What is progressive (i.e. forward-looking) in our country about
seeking to return to the 1920's and Carrie Nation and Prohibition
while repeating that disastrous social engineering experiment
again? What is progressive about going back to the days when
Segregation was the order of the day? Don't tell us for one
second that excluding smokers from jobs and housing and beaches and et cetera, doesn't
harken back to those bad old days.
Leg
Iron spoke of the tenacious quandary of the traditional vote, e.g., the
smokervoter here who votes Democrat because his father did and clings
to the outdated notion that they're the party of the working
man.
This even after they raised the price on roll-you-own tobacco by 2,000%
to pay for childrens health insurance for people making upwards of
$80K/year with the S-CHIP tax hike.
He also raised
the possibility that smokers might want to turn to the Libertarian party to
throw the Righteous rascals out. We agree that in a perfect
world the Libertarians would run things, (or un-run things, if
you will) but unfortunately they've become perennial one per-centers
in the minds of the electorate. He spoke of the perceived
power with voters of brand name politics and that is precisely the problem
with the Libertarians. People equate them with highly
principled also-rans.
Might we suggest the formation, from
scratch, of the Smoker's Party instead. The brand name would be less
ambiguous than Libertarian, which contains that damnable Lib-word within, which
can confuse and turn off some. Ah yes, the Smokers Party,
it's goal and use to the voter would be right there in the title.
It could attract like a magnet and energize angry smokers to
stand up and be counted unequivocally. It might prove easier for a
tradition-bound voter to abandon the Labour party (goal and use in the
title) or the LibDems (again) for the Smokers Party. Just a
thought.
In the event that no coalition can be cobbled together, there is the possibility of a second round of elections looming. Our glass half-full, optimistic Rosy Best Case Scenario Two for the beleaguered British smokervoter might look something like this: In a palm to the forehead moment, Conservative political strategists suddenly wake up to the realization that there is a swarm of 9.5 million angry bees out
there looking for a new hive to migrate to. They might consider adding a dollop of honey to their pie recipe, borrowed from the UKIP, in order to put them over the top.
As crazy as a do-over election might seem at first blush, it would have been preferable to the hanging chads and judicial shenanigans that dragged on endlessly in our 2000 contest. Of course, if the result had been a Gore victory, in light of his subsequent great Global Warming Scam, maybe that wouldn't have been such a good idea.
Here it is, Leg Iron's Day-After Take on
the Election: http://underdogsbiteupwards.blogspot.com/2010/05/race-that-nobody-won.html
And
here is the Frank Davis reaction fresh of the presses titled Election
Night Progressivism: http://frank-davis.livejournal.com/#post-frank_davis-72820
Frank's
DIY Network Post: http://frank-davis.livejournal.com/33784.html
Anyway,
that's our foolhardy, semi-literate first
impression. If they happen to read this, both Frank and Leg
Iron will probably have a good laugh at our inexpert synthesis, but we're slowly learning who's who and what's what and then anteing up our two cents to the pot.
We're just smokervoter.com, plugging away at it since 2001 and still endeavoring
against all odds to dismantle the Nanny State piece by piece.
And while we've become completely fascinated with UK politics, we know
we've got no business whatsoever sticking our nose into their internal
affairs. That being said, we greatly admire their blogs and
wish them and all of the good people of the UK continued success and a
brighter future. When you can savor a luscious crystal glass
of Scotch and smoke a blessed cigarette (on par with the first
cigarette of the day with a cup of coffee here) in peace again at the
local pub, our work will be done.
PS:
While researching the UK Election results we were constantly
delayed and stymied by this:

Would
you computer science geniuses and Web 2.0 developers of the
world please do something about this ! It is annoying beyond belief
!
Damn the javascripts to hell !!!
Oh, and
one last thing while we're saluting the UK...the Yardbirds are the
greatest band that ever walked the face of the earth. Thank
you for the Yardbirds and Jeff Beck, too.
***
Footnote from Lisbon Treaty reference - dragged up from below:
As a
Senator, Obama joined nine U.S. Senate colleagues in calling on
former President Bush to send to the Senate for ratification the
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, the world's first public
health treaty.
Life's
Still a Beach for Golden State SmokersGovernor Arnold
Vetoes Hateful State Beach Smoking Ban in California.
Here's
some late
breaking news for Californians who smoke. Our Republican
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger just vetoed a bill forged by our
left of North Korea state legislature that would have banned smoking at
all state beaches in California. The Governator makes no
secret of his love of a good cigar. He even once set up a
tent outside of his office at the Capitol to smoke stogies.
He said the bill crossed the line on government intrusion in his veto
message.
Arnold did throw the enviro-hounds a bone when he lent some undeserved
credence to the ridiculous cigarette butt shoreline damage argument as
an aside, but we'll forgive him for that, politics is politics. The
bills author, a Democrat (naturally) from a greasy, grimy seaport near
Los Angeles, apparently found cigarette butts to be more harmful to
marine life than the discharge from ships that ply the waters in her
port city.
What an outrage this would have been to the smokers of the Golden
State, who kick in over a
billion dollars a year to the state kitty through tobacco taxes, to
have been effectively banned from the beach. Who wants to go
to the beach and spend the whole time having a nicotine fit?
Banning smoking at the beach strikes us as just a tad
far-fetched. The air
constantly changes at the beach. To claim people are in
danger of dying from a whiff of tobacco smoke while laying out in the
sand is utterly preposterous and everyone knows it, including the
people who advance such nonsense. But they run with it
nonetheless and they get their little bans passed.
Once again a familiar pattern emerges, a Democrat controlled
legislative
body seeks to banish and segregate smokers and a Republican comes to
the rescue. Unless you're engulfed in some kind of morbid
guilt complex about smoking, do not ever throw your vote away on a
Democrat.
Due to the political realities of our times, while the GOP
may not love you or officially condone tobacco use, they do, because of
their inborn resistance to big government, often come to your defense.
Angela Howe, an attorney for the Surfrider Foundation in San Clemente
CA, a fine beach
town that once housed Richard Nixon, was very upset with the Governator
over his veto. Perhaps she should go back and watch the
1960's classic surfing movie "Endless Summer" again. Everyone
chain smoked through the entire flick. We're not sure how old Angela
is, but these guys were quite likely riding waves before she was
born. If a revisionist nicotine Nazi had attempted to
retroactively airbrush out all the cigarette smoking in this movie,
there wouldn't have been anything left to watch.
Please don't throw us that 'look what happened to all the guys in that
movie' crapola
either. Smoking had nothing to do with what became of their
lives. Those were better times all around and they all looked
pretty happy to us. Back then surfers weren't fighting 30
other people for a wave, nor did they have to do battle with a bunch of
zero defect, OCD saddled politicos lecturing the world on how to live
life according to their narrowly delimited terms.
She might also want to look at a historical graph of the Gross National
Product and track
the twin upward trend lines of tobacco usage and rising living
standards that
end right about the time legislating and regulating every single iota
of daily life came into fashion. To hell with her, she should
be
ashamed of her subliminal hatred for people who smoke. It's
nothing
more than repackaged left-wing bigotry, pure and simple, and everyone
knows it now. Angela and her ilk probably think they've got
the wool pulled over everyones eyes, with their phony overarching
concern with public health, but no one is buying it any more.
They hate people who smoke and don't want them at their
beach. That is what was really behind this horrid piece of
legislation that met with a veto.
Coastal environmentalists have a big issue with cigarette
butts. Most
smokers don't want a beach that resembles an industrial ash can
either. But as usual, the problem is overblown a hundredfold
by the detractors. It would be a nice gesture for we smokers to
bring an ash tray to the beach (kind of problematic) or, at the very
least, to dig down a good foot into the sand to dispose of our
filters. Out of sight, out of mind and only the most heavily
afflicted OCD nuts will manage to lose sleep over it.
The local Girl Scouts may go out on a weekend cleanup mission with the
local press in
tow and dig down to find a few stray ones, so bury them nice and
deep. They'll weigh them out on a scale and scream bloody
murder, but let's face it, this is just another one of their many imaginary
bogeymen, like global warming. Of course, they'll finally
get to the one inch long butts after they've dealt with the Big Gulp
plastic super cups and fast food wrappers that really spoil the view.
If you really want to be a thoughtful and gracious beach-going smoker,
you might want to
buy a nice, big 32-ounce soft drink on your way out to the
sand. You can use it as an ashtray to properly dispose of
your cigarette butt, assuming you smoke the filtered variety.
When you're ready to leave, if there is a trash receptacle nearby, just
toss it in
there and everyone will be happy, even the environmental pressure group
attorneys. If there isn't a receptacle to be found, just put
it in your car and dispose of it properly at home. No harm,
no foul. And don't worry about whether the foam cup will
accommodate your little tiny spent butt. We did a little cylindrical
area math, and came up with 1,568 as the number of butts that would fit
into just one 32-ounce foam cup.
We're
thinking the
real underlying issue for these New Age green-robed klansmen is the
usual suspect -
the smell of tobacco smoke. The beach is a place where all
kinds of smells waft around, that's just the way it is. The
ambient salty air carries scents of coco-nutty suntan lotion, the
hot dogs those people next to you are polishing off, the seaweed
and all the rest of the trappings of a day at the beach. As
hard as Progressive types try, they will never succeed in attaining the
fat-free, smoke-free, salt-free, odorless world they seek - olfaction
is here to stay.
Bringing health scaremongering to the sea shore opens a
lot of doors we should
definitely not be visiting, unless we want to simply shut off the beach
to everyone as an unacceptably risky place for
humans to congregate at.
Wayward tobacco smoke is just the tip of the iceberg when you stop and
think about
it. Swimmers drown at the beach. Sunbathers are
exposed to dangerous levels of melanoma-inducing UV rays. The
camp fires that serve to toast marshmallows are putting out more toxic
wood smoke than a thousand cigarettes. All of these harrowing
threats to life and limb are taking place atop a substance that causes
silicosis - sand.
This made us think
about a great, super-funny piece Frank Davis wrote about health nuts,
beaches, sand,
and silicosis in Dec of 2009. We originally intended to write
our own article on the topic based on his hilarious tract and then link
to it, but, like a lot of online literature projects it was never
finished. The plan was to tie the story into Silicon Valley,
Santa Cruz, CA and Steve Jobs with his reneging on Apple warranties if
the owner smoked, but it all got too disjointed and spread out.
This
is
one of the
most humorous, but telling pieces he's ever produced. We're
still laughing at the concept of sand-free
beaches he advances at the conclusion. The link
to it will appear at the bottom of this article - DON'T MISS IT - It is
an absolute classic.
Also, in one of the
older articles on this site, down towards the bottom of the page where
a lot of really good writing sits waiting for you to read, there's
mention of a domino-effect series of beach town smoking bans.
This is a very old vintage piece that was probably penned five years
ago. Use the Ctrl-F internal page search and type in NOT
WELCOME if you're so inclined to do so.
The article
was
produced with good old FrontPage Express and it features a crazy little
widget this trusty old Microsoft program sported that makes the word
NOT WELCOME blink on and off. It might not work on all
browsers, but if you're lucky, it's neat to watch. The NOT
WELCOME, of course, refers to the door mat being placed out for smokers
by
some coastal cities. You're encouraged not to spend any money
in these snot-nosed beach towns, which should result in a 20% decrease
in retail sales therein.
Here is the link to "Welcome
Sir Liam"
by Frank Davis from his Banging
On About the Smoking Ban blog.
UPDATE:
FROM THE WEIRD TIMING, WE CAN'T MAKE THIS STUFF UP CORNER OF THE
TWILIGHT ZONE THIS:
China
scientists find use for cigarette butts.
http://www.beijingtoday.com.cn/blogger/ahen/china-scientists-find-use-for-cigarette-butts
Did
you notice the weasel words "can kill fish" in there? Anyone
want to fathom a guess at how many trillions of gallons of water there
are in the sea for some proper context? Do you really think
that cigarette butts are even in the top ten list of fish killers on
planet earth? Shall we ban all ocean-going ships,
too? Shall we ban fishing?
Seriously,
we're not making light of this. Please, please don't dispose
of cigarette butts at the beach. That totally
sucks. Bring an ash tray or a container of some sort to the
beach. We love fish and we love seafood. Now if
there was just some way to catch and eat fish without killing them in
the process. Again, not joking...
Human
smokers temporarily out of the spotlight thanks to secondhand smoking
violation emanating from Icelandic volcano.
The
hopes of banning any and all forms of smoke-emitting activity on planet
earth by the public health stratocracies were dashed when a volcano in
Iceland apparently failed to get the memo. Airborne traffic
throughout Europe was catastrophically affected, stranding passengers
and costing the airlines millions of Euros. Smokers got a temporary
reprieve from the news headlines blaming them for the devastation of
mankind's collective respiratory tract and the bankrupting of
national healthcare treasuries.
The horrid,
instantaneously cancer causing by-products contained in every wispy
cloudlet of spent cigarette fumes are no match for the damage caused by
the razor sharp, glassy aerial jetsam belching from Iceland's volcano.
It reeks havoc with the delicate turbine mechanisms
that power our jet airplane fleets. Finally, something even
deadlier than tobacco smoke grabbed the attention of the six o'clock
news anchors (typically brought to you by advertisements paid for by
the pharmaceutical industry) to scare you into proper submission to
governmental health diktats cooked up by the Democrats.
How frustrated
these folks must feel when mother nature just won't bend to their
prissy commands that combustion in any form not involve the emission of
any smoke in the process. Although it should be fairly
obvious that even progressives drive cars, they somehow come across as less guilty
of polluting the air because
they
care. Yes, they care. Caring is what it is all about to the
Righteous Left. Al Gore can muster up that very concerned look and
earnest inflection with the best of them. And the nouveau Puritan crowd eats it
up like candy (disclaimer: Candy contains high fructose sugar,
except when used as an aphorism), even as he jet sets from public appearance
to public appearance while discharging a carbonyl trailing wake behind
him.
The same holds true when it comes to food consumption and fat production.
If we could all just eat food without any calorie-producing ingredients, like
arugula from Michelle Obama's Organic White House garden, there would be a surplus in the nations healthcare account ten years down the road, as promised. Perfectly thin specimens of model citizenry would push life expectancy numbers to new record
highs. How to pay for this inverted age pyramid? No problema, sin taxes to the rescue.
In the la-la-land envisioned by the pure-as-driven-snow perfectionist crowd, who celebrate Earth Day with a passion bordering
on mania, all the laws of physics would be dealt with by the simple pressing of yet another international Don't Do This

Sign. They just can't get enough
of these. If you want to see more of these signs everywhere, just vote for the Democrat on your ballot in November.
But don't count on Mother Nature, the volcano in Iceland, the billion
people worldwide who choose to smoke, nor the human body's steadfast
tendency to store fat for the winter, to get the memo.
Inside
the mind of the Humanitarian Progressive
Come November we've
got a Nanny State to dismantle. Register your disgust at the
polls.

If you're still not convinced that
Progressives (read: Democrats) are out to do you harm if you smoke
or like soft drinks, read this comment we came across posted
on the Think Progress website. The article attacks Dick
Armey, whose FreedomWorks organization rejects the imposition
of any
Soda Taxes and cigarette taxes. A certain
spencers mom
lays out her agenda for paying for Obama's Healthcare in the comment
section. She feels that she's got a real winner in that not
only does she pay for healthcare on the backs of the obese and we
smokers, but she punishes the Red States (read: Republican) in the
bargain.
Here's her comment:
"Just
put a huge tax on cigarettes, and make it illegal to ship cigs from
Indian reservations or from overseas.
Know who will
get hit hardest? The Red States that grow the tobacco. I'd love to see
a big tax on products containing high fructose corn syrup, too, since
this addictive product has been used as the cheaper substitute for
sugar.
If we're going to reform healthcare, we need
to eliminate the things that lead to the most disease, and smoking and
obesity top the list.
PEACE
"To
which we would reply: You've just galvanized 64% of the adult
population (the so-called obese) and another 20% of the population (the
smokers) into a self-preserving voters bloc that in combination
constitutes 84% of the adult population. We sure hope you
succeed in getting your way this November with an overwhelming 16% of
the people behind you - you disgusting, freeloading loser.
PEACE - from smokervoter.com
Re-read our 'Delusions
of Grandeur' article, which opines that the hard core, smoker-hating
rabble probably consists of around 15% of the population, at best.
Scroll down until you see the peacock graphic.
Obama Health Czar on
NBC
RWJF Insider
Nancy-Ann DeParle on Meet the Press
Did
you catch Nancy-Ann DeParle on Meet the Press on Feb 28th?
Just to refresh your memory, she's Obama's health care reform czar.
She's also one of his RWJF insiders. She repeated "solve
those problems" at least 20 times.
That was obviously her key talking
points
buzzword. David Gregory grilled her on the urgency factor
relentlessly. She wouldn't concede, nor back down one
inch. The people want healthcare and they want it now
according to DeParle. And her name was hyphenated, which is
always a good sign of someone to avoid like the plague. She
looks awfully young to be lecturing this two-hundred+ year old
country on the wisdom of adopting her health care plan. The
folks at Robert Wood Johnson Foundation were likely on the edge of
their seats, hoping she came across as credible to the vast audience.
We went
back and did some more research on Czar Nancy and sure enough she's a
big anti-tobacco zealot. We wanted to get this out while it's fresh, so
we'll backtrack later and fill in more details on some of her past
statements on tobacco control. For now, suffice it to say that if
you just take her Meet the Press interview body language and overall demeanor, it's clear she's a control freak first and foremost
and a glassy-eyed demagogue to boot.
Did
you also notice that they threw in a loathsome "The More You Know"
hit
piece against smoking featuring Brian Williams right before the final credits
rolled? Curious timing to be sure, a mainstream NBC public service ad and a RWJF
guest slot hitting the airwaves like a one-two punch on smoking and
healthcare at the same time.

Any healthcare bill
fashioned by this consummate reformed-smoker President and his team of
RWJF insiders will contain nothing but pain for smokers, people of size
and anyone who feels that eating and drinking whatever you want is a
fundamental right best left to the individual. Mandated
bright and shiny model citizens will become the order of the day,
enforced and backed up with soda taxes, fast food taxes and compulsory Chantix regimes. Make sure and watch out for those nasty little side effects they mention at the end of the ads.
President
Obama and the Democratic-controlled legislature have been a disaster for
American smokers. It is mission critical that all smokers in
this country register to vote immediately and then make damn sure they show
up, rain or snow, and vote this November. Ever respectful of
your intelligence and free will, we won't even suggest who you should
cast your ballot for. All we ask is that you review the
history of the War on Tobacco from its inception on Day One of the
Clinton
administration in Jan 1993 to the present and compare the stances and
votes of the two main political parties.
If
you still want to vote Democrat after thinking it over, you do need
your head examined. Sorry to be this scornful about it, but
the future of personal freedom hangs in the balance. For the
umpteenth time we will repeat that a coalition of smokers, the
so-called obese and soda pop drinkers, voting in unison for the party (R)
that values smaller government (at least on paper) over the big
government alternative (D), can and will dismantle the
Nanny State in our lifetimes.

Does
Tobacco Really Stink?BRAINWASHING
FOR THE GREATER GOOD ? OKAY ?
You
hear it all the time from our glum, ubiquitous detractors - smoking
stinks. The overpowering smell permeates their clothing and
their
hair and makes a few of them wrench. Nothing seems to thrill
the
blog reader who leaves hit-and-run blog comments more than using the
stink word. You can just picture
them snickering like an
adolescent class clown to themselves after they've hit the submit
button and the whole world is now informed of their little problem with
cigarettes.
We
have nothing but sympathy for the
poor dears,
shampoo costs about a buck a bottle and laundry detergent is a major
expense. Wearing the same outfit on Sunday that you sported
last
evening while looking for the heart of Saturday night does save a lot
of
needless hassle.
Even those who've attained most
favored status
on society's health totem pole aren't guaranteed not to produce an
offensive odor with some of their activities. Uber-salubrious
joggers stink if they don't take a quick shower after their
run.
They wouldn't dream of going out in public dressed in their sweaty,
stinky jogging duds. Jogging causes sweat and sweat
stinks.
Shall we all proceed over to the jogging sites and leave nasty little
comments all over the place about what a filthy obsession jogging is?
You'll get a much
clearer picture of
primal human nature by going
back 500 years in history, and there the facts speak volumes on whether
we're
preordained to dislike the smell of burning tobacco.

If tobacco
does indeed stink you might expect the earliest disciples of this plant
to have been repelled by its stench. Well, when none other
than
Christopher Columbus first encountered the Mayans on San Salvador
Island in October of 1492, they brought out their most prized wares to
show off to the strange new visitor. This was the all-star,
top
rung stuff they presented to the captain, and not what they considered
some unappealing reeking matter. There's not much point in that if
you're trying to score bragging rights. They showcased some dried
tobacco leaves, something they obviously treasured for its splendid
aroma. Any way you want to interpret this, it shows that
people
more than likely have a natural propensity to enjoy the olfactory
sensation derived from burning tobacco leaves. So now that tobacco
supposedly stinks to high heaven, it's apparent that someone or
something is intervening with some mighty strong
brainwashing here.
At one point in our history, not
that long
ago, hardly anyone seemed to object to the smell of tobacco. If more
people were completely honest they'd probably admit to actually
enjoying it. But being completely honest is a lost art form,
done
in by political correctness. It almost seems oxymoronic to
use
the term correctness when it results in incorrect sentiments.
Our
nasal receptors haven't evolved in fast forward mode, rather the brain
attached to them has been thoroughly cleansed of any positive reactions
by the brainwashing efforts of the tobacco control pressure groups.
Groups
like the American Cancer Society and the Lung Association now wear
their mind control accomplishments like a badge of honor.
Raymond
Shaw, the brainwashed assassin character in 1962's the Manchurian
Candidate, is their poster boy now. The shadowy
Chinese and
Russian agents who got to him are now the heroes of the plot when
viewed from the freshly minted perspective of the ACS. When things become
fallibly flipped, remember that it only takes one more rotation to get
back to the original
place where things made sense.
It's
a
sad day when behavior modification and conditioning become okay as long as
it's done in the name of public health or for the ever present
Saving
the Children purpose. Smokers, the overweight and the rest of
us flawed-but- free souls should reject being artificially
manipulated by anybody. We're not Pavlov's dogs here, we're
the
people - smoking or non-smoking, lean or plump. And we've got this
little thing called a vote. If you're one of the politicians
who favors banning everything that doesn't pass your finicky little
smell test you can count on losing your next contest.
Anyone
who has ever been
around a Hav-a-Tampa cigar being smoked will wind up conceding that
tobacco can and does produce a most pleasant fragrance. The
secret to Hav-a-Tampa's delightful aroma is probably vanilla and just a
hint of cherry. Hav-a-Tampa's had been a Tampa, Florida gem
of a
company since 1902 and employed 500 locals producing the popular
cigar until the S-CHIP bill was passed by the Democrats. The
bill
increased the tax on cigars eight-fold and effectively raised the price
to the end-user by 50%. This proved to be too much for the
top
line of the company and sales dropped 30% in 2009. To
compensate
and remain profitable under that kind of constraint they shut down the
Tampa plant and moved the jobs to the Dominican Republic. What a sad
ending for the people of Tampa, brought to you by the Nanny State and
its main sponsor - the Democrats.
Admittedly, stale
tobacco
smoke is not exactly appealing, but then again neither is stale
perfume. We're not even going to go there, the violating
cologne
zeitgeist has been whipped to death like a dead horse. It's
just
that banning everything that offends anyones sense of smell is a losing
proposition. We suggest re-growing a spine and
rejecting
all propositions that ban smoking categorically.
Vegans
complain about the smell of meat grilling in the cookhouse and
steak-eaters complain about the awful, lingering transfer of patchoulie
oil essence unavoidably emitted by the Vegans. Round and round it goes,
where it stops nobody knows. The bar has always been one of
society's great mixing bowls and trying to shield everyone from one
another along personal preference lines totally defeats its primary
theme of open-ended amalgamation.
Where, oh where,
are the
graveyards full of ex-bartenders, waitresses and bar patrons, all dead
and six feet under from laboring and partying at the local smoky dive
for years and years? Don't worry, if they don't exist now,
someone will create them for us in the form of yet another
incontrovertible "scientific" study. For bar workers the very
real threat to life came in the form of intervening in and quelling
booze-fueled disagreements among the partying faithful.
A
common sense solution to this problem would seem to be allowing a bar
owner to designate and dedicate a separate area for smokers to
congregate in. Put in smokeless ashtrays, ventilate the holy
hell out of the area, and then remove
what little escapes to the remainder with normal means. Don't
split hairs or get down to unattainable infinitesimal quantifiers;
remove the majority of the smoke and be done with it.
Everyone is
accommodated and everyone is happy. The bar stays open,
employees
keep drawing paychecks, life goes on.
Legions of bar
owners are still waiting patiently for the promised droves of
fun-loving health fanatic party people to magically materialize and
boost their sales into the stratosphere. They're still
holding out hope that untapped throngs of weekend warriors will
temporarily put their OCD on hold and saddle up to the barstools
vacated by their old smoking clientele. The problem here
might just be this little enigmatic factoid we'll drag up from a prior
article down the page
regarding OCD symptoms - [Persons
with
obsessive-compulsive personality disorder often become
uncomfortable in situations that are beyond their control and
have difficulty maintaining positive, healthy interpersonal
relationships as a result.] Sorry, but that's
not exactly the
profile of the model bar customer.
All of the touted studies, including one by Stanton Glantz
and
company, predicted increased saloon receipts once they all went
odorless and smoke-free.
Unfortunately
this isn't what's happening as of now. Due to the newly
conditioned public perception that tobacco stinks, bars are closing
here and, as Frank Davis laments
over on his great blog, pub culture is
being systematically destroyed in Great Britain.
Everyone has
retreated to their respective, lonely little corners and social
interaction is on the wane. Part of the admission price of a
night out on the town was to come home smelling of tobacco and Old
Spice or Chanel No. 5. and at one time people somehow managed to carry
on. The sure cure was a quick hot shower and a change of
clothes.
This has now become too much to ask and
that is what truly stinks.
MICHELLE
OBAMA UNVEILS CHILDHOOD OBESITY CAMPAIGN
When we heard that
Michelle Obama was planning on unveiling her "Let's Move" childhood
obesity campaign, we sighed profoundly in anticipation of what was
coming for
our "people of size" friends out there. We watched it on the PBS Newshour
first and then on mainstream NBC to get the full ultra-left to
medium-left spectrum of her sales pitch and follow-up interviews. Let
us start
by saying that we are not of the Now-It's-Their-Turn
school of thought on
this topic. That is a short-sighted position to take and
doesn't serve anyone well. There's a beating heart in our
chest and,
after what we've been through in the War on Smoking, the last thing we
want
to see is another segment of our society tied to the whipping post.
We grabbed the keyboard and took some notes as we watched and
here are some reflections of what transpired.
The
first thing that hit us was the fact that, as hard as she might try to
come across as an Everyday Jane, Mrs. Obama possesses the aloof glower
of a stayed-in-college-too-long-to-relate elitist. She talks
in pre-packaged, shrink-wrapped boilerplate as a general rule.
She's probably not very good at poker either. When
interviewer Jim Lehrer
surprisingly put the word scold
into a question, you could literally see the wheels cranking in her
mind
to come up with a soft sell answer. Surprisingly we say because for the
most part, although PBS has a lot of fine programming, it often comes
across
as a publicly-subsidized arm of the Democratic party media machine.
It
also receives a lot of funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
What
really leaped out from the interview was her dropping of the phrase
"lifestyle overhaul". The last time we looked there wasn't
any reference in the Constitution to lifestyle overhauls.
There is mention of life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness in the Declaration of Independence, but no
life overhauling.
Does
she mean that a youngster of size should
pull into Michelle's little service bay with their inborn, fat-seeking
id
and, after a good brainwashing and cajoling session, emerge with a new
outlook on life that includes favoring only organic vegetables from the
White House garden while summarily rejecting Pepsi's and Cheetos.
All in all, it struck us as a very ominous term, and it was
starkly revealing of her statist mindset.
Read
between the lines of the interview and this entire initiative and you'll find it was actually
the opening salvo to the eventual introduction of either A.) A Soda
Tax B.) A Fat Tax or C.) Both. Her husband hinted
around about a soda tax in an interview with a men's fitness magazine.
The word is that they're going for a levy of somewhere between a penny
per ounce to a nickel. While we certainly aren't happy about
this and we're totally against playing the tit-for-tat card (that is so
counter-productive and just wrong) it could mark the beginning of the
end for the Nanny Government trend. A nickel per ounce
basically doubles the current price of a can of soda pop. There's bound
to be a lot of pushback when this materializes. There's
definitely enough
pushback there to completely topple the already teetering Democratic
party regime, whose
leadership hooked up their horses to the nanny state bandwagon in
earnest long ago.
Just
take one look at the quantity of soft drinks consumed yearly by the
populace and you'll see that a soda tax changes everything.
This isn't your ordinary tobacco sin tax. Gone is
the Clinton-Reiner blueprint of pitting the majority against a
helpless, captive minority. We wrote about this in a column
twelve
years ago. Clinton saw it as a stealth tax that would raise
revenues while harming his re-election chances the least. With
California's Prop10 in 1998, Rob Reiner out and out pulled a
gangland-style plundering of smokers billfolds in broad daylight to
fund his pet project. Doubling the price of soda pop won't go
unnoticed, it's the kind of everyday irritant that voters will take
into the booth with them.
Now
that the First Lady of the United States has taken up the cause,
childhood obesity will be elevated to widespread discussion fodder at
the nation's schools. The insults and insinuations towards
rotund kids will multiply, as if they needed any more than they've
always
received, if what's happened to smokers is any indicant. The
obesity prevention missives will ratchet up to the intensity levels
we're seeing now against tobacco use. The onus of impotence,
lower earnings potential, social isolation, and anything that will
stick to the wall will be engaged in by the calorie-counting crossing
guards.
Now on to the MSM
(mainstream media) coverage. NBC spun the story
without any attention to the other side of question such as;
what
business is it of the government to intervene in what you choose to buy
at the supermarket in the first place? Interestingly enough,
Michelle's textbook media
massage was followed by a piece on third hand smoke.
This is
where Brian Williams' poker face failed him. As he was
reading the story you could see the gears grinding once again, he was
announcing it, but he wasn't buying it. Third hand smoke is
yet more stretching of the credulity barrier to it's absolute breaking
point. There will be more on third hand smoke later, we promise.
We found a real doozy on this one from a blog by a fellow
named Uncle Marvo. The setup he used to make his point was
nothing short of brilliant. The obesity news was
coming fast and furious on this night.
NBC
then carried the
story of the Hollywood director who was unceremoniously and cruelly
bumped from a flight on Southwest airlines for weighing too much.
The guy went ballistic on Twitter and the backfire to
Southwest was swift and certain. It was good to see people
backing him up for a change, rather than automatically taking the side
of the airline
on the grounds that if he just consumed fewer calories, none of this
would have taken place. That is such a vacuous argument, it
just screams of intolerance and ill will. We're better than
that aren't we?
You just have to
wonder how much
extra cost is involved in transporting a passenger who weighs in excess
of the statistical average. We'd love to know the actual
number. If the number is as small as we suspect it is, and
even if
it meant raising ticket prices by a dollar or two, it wouldn't mark the
end of airline travel. The policy in place is discriminatory
and downright insulting and should end.
Finally,
Michelle promised us all that she would be doing some public service
announcements on the childhood obesity issue. We'll be
waiting with baited breath for these. This is just what the
world needs now: more sappy, idiotic PSA's to click off with the remote
when they appear on the television. Now picture this:
your corpulent child sitting around watching television with
some shoolmates and feeling stigmatized when the First Lady of
the United
States comes on and starts scolding her/him for not measuring up to the
perfect BMI.
It's plain to see that The First Lady
has had some serious public persona coaching. She didn't let
any major gaffes loose like the time she blurted out "I Hate Smoking"
in response to a question about her husband's smoking habit.
We're sure she meant it in the old 'hate the sin, love the
sinner' context, but you've got to be really careful in tossing around
the h-word. Anyone not listening closely enough could easily have
misinterpreted this as "I Hate Smokers", which is probably not far from
the truth of the matter.
If
you happen to like soda pop or your kid weighs a little too much right
now, you
are cordially invited by we smokervoters to join us in voting for any
party other than the Democrats in the approaching mid-term elections.
Overhaul the Congress this
November and then the sin tax happy executive branch come the year
2012. Give
these
relentless health nags the heave ho.
OK, Let's go back to the top of the page now

Here we go again,
globe-trotting around the planet aboard a cyberspace rocket ship while
gazing upon a selection of
websites put together by fellow freedom addicts around the world.
This go
round has us visiting our good neighbor to the north - the vibrant and
majestic country of Canada.
One
of the many preceding articles
Exporting Nouveau Puritanism
on this page dealt with America's most
unwanted foreign export - Nanny Statism. Reading up on a few
of
the Canadian websites, it's clear that the War on Tobacco (and junk
food and soda pop, et. al. ) has opened up another front up north.
All apologies are in order from smokervoter.com, it certainly
wasn't our intention to infect you with our Nouveau Puritan political
movement. Once it digs in its heels and starts spreading, it's hard to
halt. The solution is the same on both sides of the border.
Ascertain which political party has hooked their horses up to
the
bandwagon of extreme government intrusion into places it doesn't
belong, and vote them out of office.
Defeating the
Nannies isn't as daunting as it might seem at first glance.
They've alienated and ostracized everyone who smokes, who
weighs
more than the acceptable BMI (fat-o-meter) Index and those who
quench their
thirst with a soda pop. That list alone adds up to a lot of
potentially aggravated voters. And there's more, there's a
fair
amount of folks who just plain don't cotton to being told what to
consume by
faceless bureaucrats, period. Let's face it, almost nobody
likes a
messianic busybody in the long run.
Separately
none of these groups constitute a majority, but when combined into a
voting bloc of citizens against government encroachment, citizens for
personal choice, and citizens against prohibition, they most surely do.
We fully support our Canadian friends in their efforts to
protect
civil liberties for all.
Here are three great
pro-freedom Canadian websites we came across. Check them out,
they're outstanding.
 | This
is an excellent website. The initials stand for Citizens
Against
Government Encroachment. It's in English and French and
there's a
lot of well thought out content on it. Visit it often and
bookmark it. It's frequently updated. Highly
recommended reading for the smokervoter. |
 | They've
got an active and interesting Forum on this site. Their
Guiding
Principles are very sound and admirable. Great Site from
our Good Neighbors to the North. | |
 | Prohibition
was a monstrous failure. Why anyone in their right mind would
want to
revive it is beyond imagination. But the tobacco control
lobby
persists in their dream of a tobacco-free world. This site is
a must
join. Fight the neo-prohibitionists to the bitter end - or
suffer the
consequences of apathy. |
Invariably
on these jaunts a brand new factoid will pop up out of nowhere.
During
our visit to the International Coalition Against Prohibition
website, we gleaned this disturbing little piece of information by way
of an article we linked up to authored by Michael L. Marlow,
one of the
scheduled guest speakers at their upcoming March 15th convention.
The
article by Marlow on the economic effects of smoking bans on bar owners
cites a Gallup poll article wherein it states that more Republicans
than Democrats, by a 62% to 53% margin, support banning smoking in
restaurants. Here is just a short blurb:
"The groups showing the greatest
movement toward banning smoking are
Republicans, frequent churchgoers, and nonsmokers -- though even
smokers show some movement in that direction as well."
If this is true, it's not good news at all. The
poll is five years
old and consists of phone interviews of 1,006 people.
It certainly
doesn't square up with a cursory reality check that anyone can make by
looking back at recent history. Most of the sin taxes and
lifestyle
restrictions have been the result of Democrat votes.
You've
got
to wonder how valid the opinion is of anyone who agrees to spend
fifteen minutes on the phone with one of Gallup's telemarketing-like
canvassers. Most people either hang up immediately or
decline. One
thousand people represents .00046 of the 215 million Americans
of
voting age. Statistics and polling is a weird and somewhat
suspect
science. It's frequently wrong and sometimes right.
We're in the
process of putting together another article based on yet another poll
(this one is a Rasmussen) finding we came across that claims that more
Democrats smoke than Republicans.
If this is the
case, there are definitely more people into masochism
than commonly meets the eye.
Here is a link to the
aforementioned Gallup
article.
We
would be remiss if we didn't mention Thomas "Snowbird" Laprade,
the lightning bolt out of Thunder Bay. We're longstanding
members of the
Illinois
Smokers Rights Yahoo Group, and if you're a
booster of this fine assemblage of smokers (370 at present) you're
familiar with his steady stream of apropos postings there. He
keeps everyone
there abreast of the latest news from the battlefront on a regular
basis.
The
moderator at Illinois Smokers Rights is Jason Douglas AKA Jay AKA
cooljay. Jay's got an entertaining phonetic style
of writing that packs a lot of street cred. He votes, he
writes letters to politicians, he's the consummate smokervoter.
Jay's got his own
blog
with the motto Respect Freedom of Choice. Jay smokes
Newports,
Jay loves Newports, don't try and get between Jay and his Newports.
The
Snowbird is
also not afraid to take out a pen and write to the newspaper editor and
defend our inexorable positions when they're attacked. You
can find a collection of his writings, many of them these Letters to
the
Editors, over at his Tripod
website.
In addition the Snowbird's
Tripod page does a great job of breaking down the ponderous Smokers
Club website into readily searchable topics.
Tripod
was the Lycos
flavor of Yahoo's GeoCities free web hosting platform. Before
there was a MySpace, before there was a Facebook and before there was an
overly-hyped Web 2.0 with the its questionably game changing social
networking emphasis, there was GeoCities and Tripod. The
smokervoter.com page began life as a GeoCities page.
GeoCities went bye-bye last year, Tripod is still around.
Getting
involved and sticking your neck out by voicing your opinion and
standing up for basic freedoms can be a lonely pursuit. Not
enough of us do this, and we salute the Snowbird, as he certainly
doesn't shy away from stepping up to the plate. The very
least
the smokervoter can do is to register to vote and show up on election
day and cast a vote.
The opening ceremony of the
Vancouver
Winter Olympics was truly outstanding, what a great job. It
was
such a colorful and visually spectacular feast for the eyes, you did
yourselves proud Canada. NBC has been highlighting Canadian
life
and history and culture with their coverage and we come away wishing
they'd done more of this in the past, here's hoping they'll do more
in the future.
Anyway,
here's to Thomas "Snowbird" Laprade, Illinois Smokers Rights, Jay
and Canada. In the words of Canadian musician Neil Young, Long
May
You Run.
Leg Iron Alert
What Smokers Want in
260 Words or Less
No one
should mistake being unrepentant about smoking with promoting
it. The Nicotiana
tabacum plant doesn't need a marketing department to gain
popularity with the masses. First the Mayans, and later on
the rest of the world became attracted to its amazing aroma, taste and
calming-focusing properties all by their little selves. Over
a billion people now partake of the sublime leaf. Smoking is
not going to go away. So what do smokers want?
The
venerable Scotsman Leg Iron has just blogged up another gem that
succinctly answers that question. Leg Iron's got a great minimalist
writing style which gets the point across without wasting any words in
the process. Here in about 260 words are what we smokers want.
We
could just put up a link and let you read it for yourself in context,
but we've chosen to isolate this particular section because it just
speaks to the heart and soul of the matter so well.
Here's
the setup: Sheila Duffy, is the chief executive of
anti-smoking charity ASH Scotland. ASH stands for Action on
Smoking & Health (Scotland) and it's a registered Scottish
charity that is analogous to our American Legacy Group or the tobacco
control arm of the National Institutes for Health. Cute
little acronyms like ASH are about as far these as guys go in the humor
department, after which it drops off into infantile crapola like the
currently airing Become an EX public service announcements we featured
a couple of articles down the page.
Without further
ado, here's Leg Iron on what we smokers want:
"Sheila, the only
thing that needs to be done is to take you to a quiet place and pound
your face into hamburger over a period of some weeks, using the gentle
but regular application of a potato masher. Perhaps that will bring
home the one and only thing that smokers demand in this life. Leave us
alone. That's really the sum total of what we want, you know. We don't
want to get all evangelical and promote smoking, we just want to be
left alone to get on with it. Have no-smoking places, fine. No problem.
Just let us have our places too. Otherwise, there are many non-sharp
kitchen implements in the hands of inventive smokers who are reaching a
level of blind fury and guiltless rage you cannot conceive.
What we like is the
action of smoking. We like the smoke. It's relaxing to watch it billow
into the air. It's fascinating to watch it level into a thermocline
that looks like the laser layer over the eggs in the first 'Alien'
film. We blow smoke rings and watch them dissolve.
We just want to
smoke.
In peace. Without
being treated like shit. That is really the sum total of our demands.
You can be somewhere else if you don't like it and we won't mount a
guerrilla operation to smoke you out. We don't care about you at all.
Do whatever you want, live however you want, die in any manner of your
choosing. Up to you.
Just leave us alone.
Otherwise, the potato masher awaits."
Oh, the
wit and wisdom Senor Iron exhibits with his posts. And
prolific too, sometimes two in a day. We're doing well to pop out one a
week. The nanny staters love to portray smokers as
uneducated, lower wage dullards as part of their Goebbelesque smear
campaigns. Let em' dig into Leg Iron's stuff, they can just
read em' and weep. They've got sparkling Stanton Glantz,
Carrie Nation and sourpuss Sheila Duffy. We've got Leg Iron.
We'll smoke and laugh until we die, they'll end up in the old quandary of "dying
of NOTHING".
What Sheila and her ultra-learned, well
salaried pontificates put out is Saharan in its content and dull as a
butter knife. Have you ever read any of their wearisome
compositions verbatim? Better double up on that expresso or
be prepared to grab your eyelashes by the tips. When
they try to "do funny" they customarily lapse into insipid
kids stuff. In their fervor to rescue the children they've
become the children.
In a new high in the art of
navel contemplation, a tobacco obsessive, writing in one of their
beloved journals on the exhilarating topic of whether smokers block the
little ventilation slits found on filters, wrote this - "In 1980,
Kozlowski and others described a stain pattern technique (SPT) for
unobtrusively detecting the occurrence of vent blocking with fingers or
lips. Basically, this technique evaluates the tar stain on
the mouth end of the filter, a stain spreading toward the edge of the
filter indicating the presence of vent blocking. In cases of extreme
blocking, one will note a fairly uniform tar stain across the filter.
Trained raters are able to produce reliable and valid scores using this
technique."
The lines are forming as we
speak for this position: Depleted cigarette butt condition
Inspector/Rater. Will Train.
You really didn't think
we'd leave you without a link to the full Leg Iron post
so that you could read it in proper context now did you?
A Crucial Vote Looms
in Massachusetts
A golden
opportunity
is availing itself on Tuesday in Massachusetts to deal an epic blow to
creeping Nannyism in our country. Voters who smoke and voters
who enjoy the splendors of Cheetos, Big Macs and a soft drink to wash
it down can show their utter disdain for being told what to do and how
to live by their government by getting out and voting for Scott Brown.
At stake is the Senate seat formerly held by Teddy Kennedy,
one of the chief architects of trending health care fascism in America.
This will be the ultimate slap in face to the
Congress and an administration bent on passing health care legislation
as some kind of political trophy. By all means, get out and
vote on Tuesday and begin to turn things around.
Here's
a quote from his opponent, Massachusetts
Attorney General Martha Coakley. "The
past ten years have also changed
the way society views tobacco use. Ballparks, universities and many
municipalities are gradually adopting policies that will limit
Americans exposure to second-hand smoke. These changes will lead to
fewer smoking-related illnesses and, ultimately, fewer smokers."
Come
Tuesday, you have the opportunity to make her regret these words.
What
we
want is ultimately, fewer politicians like Martha Coakley.
As
an added benefit this may spell the end of health care reform as
designed by the Democrats. Electing Scott Brown will end the
filibuster-proof status the Democrats currently enjoy in the Senate.
Ted Kennedy's adherence to the philosophy of government
ownership of its citizens bodies is well documented on this site.
Hit the Ctrl
and the F
key and type in Kennedy to recall his many
adventures in tobacco taxation and such. Before you head out
to the polls you might want to pay a visit to http://www.smokershistory.com
and
bone up on what's really in the mountains of text contained in the
bill. This intrepid author has taken the time to actually
read what's there and it ain't good if you value your free will.
Be
sure and read all about former Robert Wood Johnson Foundation trustee Nancy DeParle, Obama's health czar, to gain some valuable insight into what's in store for us all if this bill passes. There are some spicy
adjectives to this website's verbiage, but we guarantee that you won't
find another site anywhere with more careful documentation of the facts
mam' - just the facts. If you prefer to go shopping without
Uncle Sam in tow, vote for Scott Brown. Don't allow yourself
to
become one of Nancy DeParle's RWJF-crafted Barbie and Ken dolls.
Three
out of four of the wily soothsayers on the
McLaughlin Group
show
predicted a Brown victory, but they've been wrong in the past, and your
participation is crucial, so don't sit this one out folks.
Get
down to the polling booths and express your free will and make us proud
here at smokervoter.com. The capture of Kennedy's old Senate
seat
will be a scrumptious triumph to say the very least, and afterwards
we'll celebrate by downing a king sized bag of Cheetos accompanied by a
bubbly soft drink and a relaxing smoke.
Update:
Scott Brown indeed won the Kennedy seat in Massachusetts on Tuesday and
the prospects for Cheetos remaining legal, or at least not taxed at
100%, are now better. The Dems are in throttle-down mode on
health care. The preventative care provisions of this bill
contained a
lot of over-the-line intrusions into the everyday lives of the people
of this country. Quitting smoking and losing weight were
destined
to become more or less mandatory had this bill passed.

Judging
by the connections to the RWJF that Obama's main health care power
brokers have, this bill would have amounted to a recipe of yet more
anguish for
smokers and the overweight. Mandatory coverage with serious fine
and imprisonment
sanctions, bundled with government run health insurance programs
basically set the groundwork for state ownership of your
body.
And what you put into said body seems to be its main concern.
Costly policy premium adjustments for smoking or weighing in excess of
a given BMI
were sure to follow.
The
mainstream media pundits dissected the Brown
victory in every which way except the one we'd most like to
investigate at
this site. Like how many people who smoked and aligned with
the predictable blue state majority swung to the Republican in reaction to
the shock of the S-CHIP tax hike in April. How many of the
allegedly overweight among us read the handwriting on the wall and
ditched Coakley after
observing what happens to anyone whose consumption pattern falls out of
favor, as in the case of smokers. These two groups of voters
could have accounted for a large percentage of the final tally.
One
way or another there is a message for the Democrats with this special
election and that is the repudiation of nanny state mission
creep. A comfortable majority of Americans still like to call
their own shots in life. Government has its place and that
place
certainly is not at the checkout stand telling shoppers what to eat or smoke or
drink. While it's not clear if there are any fewer smokers
(Mrs. Coakley's stated ultimate goal) as
a result of this senate race, there is no longer
a Martha Coakley to contend with.

There's been a rash
of new anti-smoking PSA's hitting the airwaves lately. It
must be the completely predictable and totally pedestrian New Year's
Resolution bandwagon being saddled up for yet another go around the old
town
square. Become an EX.com - a national campaign launched in
2008 by the National Alliance for Tobacco Cessation, is running stupid
hit pieces featuring the tagline " you don't drive every time you light
up - so why do you light up every time you drive?" We light
up because we damn well choose to light up, that's why.
Driving and smoking just happen to go hand in hand, you non-smokers
ought to try it sometime and see if it doesn't at least iconically
shorten your commute time. Smoking is well-known to boost
mental concentration levels, a definite plus for highway safety.
You've
got to wonder what it must be like to work for Become an EX.com.
You're surrounded by twisted little quidnuncs of the worst
variety.
They're all on a carping mission to intervene
in the
lives of complete strangers who really mean nothing to them.
Judging by the utterly worthless
PSA's they produce, the kind of
college flotsam attracted to this kind of work must rank pretty low on
the food chain. Don't buy into the premise that they're
motivated by a selfless devotion to the health and well-being of
smokers. Adam Smith theory might not be peaking in
popularity right now, but his observations on enlightened self-interest
are hard to contest. Sales of smoking
cessation products surpassed a billion dollars last year.
No,
one of the few preconditions for employment in this industry appears to
be a complete lack of understanding of the basics of human nature.
Urging
smokers to
quit by first assuming that they'll convert thru immature dialogue,
seemingly aimed at a pre-school audience, is haughty condescension
stretched to
its outer boundary. The company men and women who make up the
squad at places like Become an EX.com are completely clueless
knuckleheads. The chances are better that you'll
quit watching TV rather than smoking
after viewing one of their nonsensical communications. They
simply
won't motivate anyone to drop the real thing and instead purchase an
expensive box of nicotine chewing gum.
The
budget must be getting tight at TobaccoFreeCA because they are
re-running the ridiculous ads showing wafting cigarette smoke somehow
managing to squeeze underneath the baseboards, thus aggravating the
asthma symptoms of one of our precious children in the next
unit. These vain propaganda pouts are an insult to the joint
intelligence of the American people.
People that get
together and create these abominations obviously have never
smoked. Having people that don't smoke write commercials that
attempt to "get through" to us smokers is a losing proposition, a
non-starter if you will. Militant non-smokers tend to be very
hackneyed and unoriginal thinkers whose real-life IQ's are much lower
than their self-perceived IQ's are.
The Democrats
have been at the helm for a little over a year now and already we've
collectively lost about twenty years of maturity in the
process. Really now, have you noticed how Nancy Pelosi
addresses the press (read: we the people) in a sing-song, Ambien-mother
way so that nothing she monotonously voices will go over the heads of
the anyone under five years of age? Harry Reid comes across
as a befuddled kindergarten teacher. Dick Durbin sounds like
a guy who just recited the Cat in the Hat. And it's just
possible that Al Gore lost his race for the presidency because his
snickering, condescending countenance simply turned a lot of people
completely off. The Dem's are definitely the Party of the
Children, but children can't vote. This might be what's
behind their sudden bungee drop from a secure 60-vote lock on the
Senate to probable bare majority status come November. The same goes
for the House of Representatives.
High school
seniors start the countdown on the first day of June for the day to
arrive when the tassels flip and the lecturing and rules
cease. There's no such transition with the advent of the
modern Nanny State. Hopefully, the perpetual childhood that
now passes for American vitality has about run its course.
Voters have to have lived through at least eighteen revolutions around
the sun to exercise their exulted volition. Talking down to the masses
and throwing out inanities like instantaneous death from secondhand
smoke or ocean breezes capable of transmitting lethal doses of tobacco
is simply not resonating anymore. Crowing on about an obesity
epidemic, as if the nations future is somehow jeopardized by the
calorie count of a Big Mac, is falling on deaf ears. The
preventative measures included in the Democrat's healthcare bill read
more like National Daycare. If it was the youth vote that put
Obama over the top in 2008, it's certainly what we've incurred since
inauguration day. Enough of this national childishness we
say, let's all grown up.
So-called scientific
charity groups, their treasuries swollen with tobacco
settlement funds, spend like drunken sailors on media buys which
bombard our brains into phlegm with
unconvincing determinations. Sorry
boys and girls, but a
incontrovertible fact doesn't materialize from a questionnaire mailed
out to one thousand subjects. John and Jane Doe, be they fat
or lean, smoker or non-smoker, or just plain existentialist, seem to be
through with voting in Democrat kindergarten schoolmarms for the
foreseeable future. This will be a welcome change and perhaps
we can begin concentrating on rebuilding a sound economy once they're
out of power.
If it's true that six out of ten
people are now overweight and that one-in-five still smoke, that alone
should provide the base on which to create the big bad wolf who blows
down the Party of the Children's flimsy cottage. Add in John
and Jane existentialist and the party is over for the Democrats come
November 2010. Just ask Senator Christopher Dodd.
Some
Interesting Commentary on Obesity from Johnson & Johnson
This
is for our supra-BMI (Body Mass Index) friends and fellow voting
coalition partners: Johnson & Johnson is very
concerned about your wellness. If you've ever wanted to be a
fly on the wall and listen in on what's being said about you, a good
vehicle for this is to go to the business section and tune in to
an earnings forecast interview. Read
this little blurb from an earnings guidance we found regarding behavior
modification and obesity. The folks at Johnson &
Johnson are
as pleased as punch with the new Obama administration and its
inherent Democrat tendency toward life-intervention via government
programs, to wit:
"Let
me comment on the wellness and prevention area and what has really
driven us into that, because I think with the new administration and
the focus on obesity around the world and diabetes and the problems
that are there, that more and more people are getting focused on taking
care of their own health and I think the administrations are starting
to look at how do we reimburse and treat these people and keep people
healthy, which is really the answer to the long term health care costs
that we have to deal with."
Take it
from some wily veterans (smokers) of the targeted class; once this
company and their research arm, the Robert Wood Foundation, gets you
under the microscope the word voluntary goes out the window.
You will do as they say or they will make your life miserable.
Continuing on, the
company speaks of efforts to cut their employee's health care costs:
"We
have a focus on obesity and weight loss; we have a focus on
cholesterol, hypertension and the areas that really many of the
co-morbidities associated with obesity and keeping people healthy and
well. We think that will also drive to engagement, absenteeism. We
know, we have documented it in our own programs."
"By looking at
the behavior modification technology that HealthMedia
has coupled with
the Human Performance Institute which looks at nutrition, exercise,
recovery and the critical pieces. Putting it together with the facts we
have we think we have a very strong model to go to governments and
other businesses with to improve the health of their employees."
If the whole notion
of behavior modification sends an uncomfortable chill down your spine
you're not alone. Democrats seem to be very receptive to
tinkering with the lives of the nation's citizenry, while the whole
concept is an anathema to the Republicans. If you're
currently carrying around a few extra pounds, you should vote
accordingly.
The Johnson
& Johnson company boy continues on during this earnings
guidance and controlling your weight is obviously tantamount to their
corporate game plan:
"If
you look at obesity here in the United States or around the world its
one of the biggest drivers of problems. If you extrapolate that out to
the co-morbidities associated with obesity, if we can get obesity under
control and that may be through surgical intervention which could be
bypass or realized gastric band, it could be through some of the
behavior modification programs and diet and exercise. Those are the
things that we are thinking about in that area."

Does
behavior modification and surgical intervention sound good to you?
Join up with the likewise homed in on and vilified
smokervoters and vote the Democrats out of power. While
you're at it, boycott Johnson & Johnson, there's a list of
products to avoid a little further down this page.
Look for a Don't Feed the Beast graphic.
A
woman in Florida just got a $300 million judgment against Phillip
Morris from a jury that spent a whole three hours in deliberation.
Got a hangover, sue
Budweiser. This
too shall be overturned. Selfish smokers like this woman
really
are in effect asking all the rest of us who partake to pay for
her
hospitalization, as her payout will eventually be borne by all of us in
the form of higher cigarette prices. The warnings on packs
started in 1966. She started in 1968 - case closed.
What
was really striking in reading the scads and scads of predictable,
droning-on comments that followed this news article were all of the
ones that
began
with "I hate smokers." This is one of the few outright
statements
of raw, anti-human animosity you'll find anywhere in print and in
public
that is still tolerated in the post-Jim Crow world. This just
goes to show how well the tobacco control campaigns have succeeded in
normalizing hate speech in the name of public health. We hope
they're proud of themselves.
And
it makes us glad we've decided to forego a comments section on this
website.
Overstated
by a factor of three
Check this out:
A Smoking Risk Calculator
I owe, I
owe, so it's off to work I go. Straight down the
on ramp at 60 miles an hour in a crumply cage of plastic and recycled
Chinese
steel. Quick now, with all mental facilities working at
utmost velocity, merge into the slow
lane. Woooah, that car ahead is going 45 miles per
hour, on the freeway! My dear God, why don't they take
surface
streets if they want to go that slow. Slam on the brakes and
watch
your life pass in front of your eyes. Driving is a calculated
risk
that we take all the time. So is smoking. Commuting
can affect your life expectancy and so can smoking.
This
is a guilt-free zone and it will remain so. If you want
guilt, just turn on the radio or the TV or search for "smoker's rights"
on the net. Oddly enough, the majority of the results turn
out to be health nag sites informing you that smoking will cut ten
years off of
your life.
The figure of ten years, probably because
we've got that many fingers, has always made the rounds as the default
number of years you sacrifice when you take the calculated risk of
smoking
tobacco. Three years also shows up in the scarespeak at
times, as in 1, 2, 3...that's sounds good, let's run with it.
So,
is it ten years or three years? What is the truth and, in
light of the Climategate scandal of scientists
fudging global warming data, how good is the science? Does
anyone make a smoking lifespan calculator?
Read on fellow smokers, we found one.
It's accuracy is anybody's
guess, but just to cut the crap down to bite-size
chunks we've put a link up to the site.
Two schools
of thought
are traveling on a collision course of yellow buses when it comes to
the subject of longevity. From the Safety First campus comes
the "we can all live forever, if we just stop eating fat foods and
smoking" crowd. From the Fiscal Sanity First student union,
there's the "social security is going to go broke paying for all these
centenarians" crowd. This is
a legitimate concern.
When you arrive at the
linked
site you will find a page with four interactive charts. The
last one down is the one you want. You plug in your gender at
the bottom. Next adjust for your age at the top, although it
doesn't go below 45. Make sure to clear the last three check
marks as we're solving for the effects of smoking. Now simply
toggle the Non-Smoker check box on and off and take note of the
different Expected Age of Death results.
What
kind of lifestyle can you expect to enjoy if you quit smoking and
manage to squeeze out those
extra years anyway? The exit offramp of life isn't
typically a well-graded thoroughfare. The last couple of years can find
you in a
nursing home or hooked up to life-sustaining machinery, a bumpy road
indeed.
The popular and highly regarded
radio doctor, Dr. Dean Edell frequently
made mention of this reality on his call-in show. While he
almost never failed to suggest that his listeners should quit smoking,
he didn't do
it in a hen-pecking way. This guy is no fan of overprotective
rules
and regulations. You get the sense he is a Libertarian at
heart.
Dr. Dean Edell is one of the very few skeptical and critical
thinking voices of reason on the airwaves today.
He was one of the first to break it to the organic food
evangelists that
their dirt clodded produce didn't increase lifespan one iota.
Have
fun playing around with this graph. We couldn't seem to make
it produce a result of ten fewer years of life no matter how we
jiggered the inputs. It appears that you may be sacrificing
around three to four tattered sunset years of existence by smoking.
Just where the commonly quoted ten year notion comes from is
anyone's guess. All the while, the Goebbels-protege tobacco
control think tanks continue to belch out polluted information to a
receptive clique
of mass media opinion sculptors for dissemination.
We'd
advise you to take their cold, hard facts with a grain
of salt from now on, but sodium is no-no, like secondhand
science and begrimed
propaganda, and should be avoided.
Here's the link,
the page is
titled Understanding uncertainty: How
long will you live?. Come on back after you get
your answer, there's an article on Mike Huckabee's likely departure
from the 2012 presidential race right below this one.
And Now on this
Optimistic Note: "It's going to happen. It's
inevitable. It can't be stopped. And it's already started." - Frank
Davis - Banging on About the Smoking Ban
The latest
blog post (as of: 12/14/2009) from the prolific Live Journalist Frank
Davis ends on an affirmative, mood-fortifying note that a reversal in
fortunes is in store for the status quo of shrinking freedom and
expanding lifestyle regulation. We'll admit it, we're in the
same optimist camp for the duration. There is no other choice
as far as we're concerned. The alternate is a ridiculous,
seventy year return back to the bad, old days of Prohibition and/or a
forty-year-old replay of the Era of Segregation.
To
make matters worse, Prohibition 2.0 will now include tobacco, junk
foods and carbonated-sweetened beverages as well as that old demon,
alcohol. Black markets will spring up just like they did the
first time. The Speakeasy (actually Cigareasy or Burgereasy)
will resurface as human nature, like a river's flow, resumes its
obdurate course.
As for Segregation 2.0, it will
take on a different cast this time around. The emphasis will shift from
ethnicity to behavior, and more specifically consumable uptake
behavior. People who smoke and people who weigh too much or
drink soda pops all day long will be systematically excluded from the
perfect health-specimen circles. Those who don't choose to
smell like an ashtray after a (once a year) night out on the town will
rejoice. Old friendships between non-smokers and smokers will
become fractured in the process. No great loss you might say,
the choice was theirs
and they simply failed to genuflect in reaction to the mandates of
change.
The workplace and any co-joined housing
setting will consist of a unified, like-minded, and above all,
health-conscious colony of worker bees. Quarrels between birds
not-of-a-feather and the chirpy, healthy majority flock will be a thing
of the past. Forget about all of the tired-old Orwell
allusions, you'll see, it'll be an improved Brave New World.
Bill and Hillary's collective rights and responsibilities agenda can
finally become a reality instead a bygone Hippie
daydream. It'll be a happy, sappy Village of the Blessed, you
just wait.
It will all be built on a big, fat pack
of lies, half-truths and cooked-up data. Saddam's atom bomb
as spelled out by the once trustworthy Colin Powell, the coastline
inundated to the window tops from melting glaciers. People
dying instantly from wafting cloudlets of smoke, exhaled by mortal
souls who magically manage to inhale this same fatal mist directly into their
lungs and still live into their seventies two out of three times.
A tagline of "According to a recent study..." has become the
tip-off to the wise that what follows should be discounted at a rate of
approximately fifty percent just for starters.
Incontrovertible evidence, as compiled by a consensus of
eggheads with a cause, now screams out sham to the wary.
At
the end of Obama's second term,
Hillary Clinton will ascend to the throne of complete righteousness and
receive her long-denied and deserved accolades from a grateful nation,
forever indebted to her for a lifetime of public service. "It
Takes a Village" will resurface at the top of the Times Bestsellers
list and we'll resemble Cuba, without the cigars, with its
blissful state of stagnated adolescence.
The alternative is for smokers, the junk food junkies (the happily obese),
the soda drinkers and the free-willed of this great country to join up in a voting bloc that
completely obliterates this future nightmare. We
upbeatedly vote for the latter. Sayonara to Al
Gore, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Cap and Trade, the
Pharmaceutical Lobby, Stanton Glantz, ASH and Johnson & Johnson
just to name a few of the bad dreams.
Here's a link
to his post: http://frank-davis.livejournal.com/39901.html
Or
if you're not into opening up another tab in the old browser right now,
here's the last three paragraphs; we truly love it.
"The
attempt to scare people, using exaggerations and lies, can only be
successful while people continue to trust the various authorities who
are trying (often very successfully) to scare them. Once they discover
that they're being fooled, trust will evaporate, and anger will mount.
And eventually they will find out. And then authority of every kind
will fall into disrepute. There will be demands for honesty and
openness and accountability.We're currently
being
duped and defrauded in so many different ways that the coming backlash
is likely to be very, very powerful. Easily powerful enough to topple
governments. People who are sick of being duped by political
authorities like Tony Blair, or by scientific authorities like UEA
climate scientists, and by medical authorities like Sir Liam Donaldson,
will all find common cause. They'll all have different individual
reasons for wanting to overthrow authority of one sort or other, but
it'll all boil down to loathing for any self-styled authority figures
in whom they'll have zero belief. Any number of quangos and fake
charities will have their public funds withdrawn, and be closed down,
and see their previously overpaid employees fired en masse. There will
be trials. There may even be tumbrils rolling through the streets to la
Place de la Guillotine. It will be a global French Revolution, as an
entire political class and its authoritative henchmen are overthrown.It's going to happen. It's
inevitable. It can't be stopped. And it's already started."
Huckabee likely out of
the
race
Pardon
My Blunder
Mike
Huckabee, the once morbidly obese ex-Governor of Arkansas, who
now
wears a super-sized chip on his shoulder for high-calorie foods, is
probably toast as far as becoming the Republican nominee in 2012.
His past pardon of the man who shot four policemen in Tacoma,
Washington is just too much to explain away with a simple soundbite.
His star has fallen and smokers can exhale a billowing silver
cloud of relief. It's certainly a tragic way to arrive at
this
destination. Our heart goes out to the victims and their
families.
It's probable Huckabee would have lost on his own volition.
Especially if we had any say in the matter.
Somewhere
along the line Mother Hen Mike
would have eventually been outed as a
nanny statist in disguise. He raised cigarette taxes two-fold
while in office, signed the statewide indoor smoking ban, and had his
sights set on taxing soft drinks. If the republicans decide
to
throw in the towel to the health crusaders and abandon their anti-nanny
state platform we're all in trouble. Libertarians here we
come.
He
had a lot of momentum going before this stumbling block. His
bass-playing gig endeared him to the youth voters. His Main
Stream
Media exposure was assured with his talk show. His aw-shucks
affability and genuine good sense of humor was disarming to the diehard
Bush haters who view any Republican as a droll, slant-jawed Dick Cheney
meanie. He never had a prayer for piling up any votes from
smokers who vote Republican, vaguely estimated to number around 14
million. Keep in mind folks, that amounts to almost a
quarter
of their constituency and therefore, is nothing to be sneezed at.
He
didn't just sign the tax increases/indoor bans into law reluctantly, he
pulled a lot of back room shenanigans to assure their success.
For those who might forget, he was the only 2008 Republican
candidate who opposed President Bush's veto last year of the proposed
expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program.
He
totally bought into the secondhand smoke mythology, and raised the bet
even farther by stating that he thought that it "poses more
of a
health risk than if someone lights up a cigarette themselves".
While
we're in quotation mode here check this one out:
"Imagine if someone took a cigarette and lit up in this room," Huckabee
told the group gathered in the Great Hall of the
Clinton Presidential Center. "You would be mugged -- and I would
personally do it."
It's not easy to say the
following to such a
congenial fellow as mother hen Mike but here it goes: Goodbye
and
Good Riddance
See if you can get a gig playing bass
for the newly forming band in DC "The Nannies".

The
newswires, the digital networks and the airborne receptors were buzzing
with the news of a group of Californian junior high schoolers beating
the crap out of seven red-haired kids. The idea was spawned
on the internet and the young punks took it an ran with it.
They called it "Kick a Ginger Day". It was a terrible thing
to do and, as you might guess, there has been mass denunciation of the
assailants.
What kind of parents raise kids that are
capable of such wholesale violence and uncaring cruelty you
ask. Well, it just so happened to take place in Calabasas,
CA., groundbreaking home to one of the most restrictive anti-smoking
ordinances to be found in the nation.
These horrible
kids are the offspring of the parents who voted in the Calabasas city
council, who in turn drafted and passed the draconian tobacco control
measure, who in turn patted themselves on their collective virtuous
backs. You won't be publicly setting any bad behavioral
examples for the children in that town, that is for sure. Smoking in
public is banned in Calabasas.
So, one pressing
social problem solved by legislative fiat and now presumably it's on to
the next. And where were the police you might ask?
No doubt, they were distracted by their mission to corral smoking
scofflaws and temporarily took their eyes off the prize. The
whole scheme was launched and broadcast for anyone with a computer and
a broadband account to intercept. The police force apparently
were just too busy scanning the horizon for bad parents smoking
cigarettes.
Boycott
Johnson & Johnson and all of it's subsidiaries
When
you roam cyberspace looking for inspiration for the next article, you
tend to bounce off of factoid after factoid while perusing the growing
number of websites with a pro-smoking slant. Read enough of
them and sooner or later you'll come to the realization that there is a
company that is dedicated to your demise if you happen to
smoke. That company is
Johnson
& Johnson
.
They are the funding machine behind the
Robert
Wood Johnson Foundation
-
the absolute mortal enemy of all tobacco consumers on planet earth.
This
foundation is, for the lack of a better term, an out-and-out hate group
masquerading as a public health research and policy
organization. We're not going to get caught up in a Socratic
dialogue here, nor bother with one of those exercises in mental
self-manipulation that ends up with 200 comments as to what defines a
hate group. Here is what we said about this a long time
ago. It's in an article way down towards the bottom of this
page, so we'll save you the trouble and retrieve it here:
"The
fact is that when
one group of people get together with the
expressed purpose of making another group of people's lives
miserable--you've got a bona fide hate group going."
If you
happen to want to read from whence this quote came from (after you've
read this piece!) here's the link.
This adequately defines
the ongoing mission of this outfit. They love you so much
that they hate you. They are so intent on modifying your
behavior that if they have to destroy you in order to save you, so be
it.
We want to keep this
article short enough to
maintain your attention span (around 750 words or less according to
the experts) so we'll get to the point. We won't go
into
great detail here, that's already been done by the good folks at Velvet
Glove, Iron Fist and many
others, including some
fine
investigative work by www.smokershistory.com.
The author at
smokershistory has compiled such a vast repository of hard, factual
information on these guys that, if you possess a functional nervous
system, you will come away from the site good and mad and
ready to do whatever it takes to stop them dead in their tracks.
It's one thing to fight the good fight against the segregationists and
prohibitionists we're up against by voting them out of existence (by
way of a grand voting coalition), but there's another weapon we should
unsheathe also. We need to starve the enemy of it's precious
working capital. That means Boycott with a
capital B.
All smokervoters
need to boycott the horrid company, Johnson &
Johnson. They need to be brought down to their malevolent
knees. Not one more red centavo should ever pass from a
self-respecting smoker's purse/wallet to this despicable Dow 30
component's bottom line. Johnson and Johnson is the devil
incarnate. The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is their
sharpened pitchfork. They produce and sell Nicoderm,
Nicotrol, Nicorettes, none of which should be purchased by any smoker,
anywhere, anytime nor anymore. Don't buy their
over-the-counter medicine stuff (No more Tylenol), don't buy
their Baby
care products, don't zombify your kids with their Concerta drug, a
product for attention deficit hyperactivity. They've got a
lot of nerve attacking smokers while producing this product.Buy
no more Neutrogena
soap, Aveeno,
Listerine
nor Band-Aids,
all of which
are easily substituted for. We wanted to get this article out
while our blood was still boiling, so we're going to cut to the chase
and just publish this long list of Johnson & Johnson (and
subsidiaries) products. We'll play catch up gradually and
put substitutions in parenthesis. Eventually, in typical
smokervoter.com fashion, this crucial list will get buried below the
fresh, new daisies at the top. You do know, don't you, that
you can search this page or any other page on the net by simply
pressing CTRL
and the F
key and, bingo, you've got yourself a search
engine that works cleanly and quickly. This saves us the
trouble of including one of those glitchy, page space squandering
search thingies that always seem to default to Google (when it should
be obvious that you want to search "within this site" or you wouldn't
be using it in the first place).
So without further
ado, here is a list of products to cross off your shopping list
forever. If you really want to get efficient, do a
cut-and-paste over to a simple text editor (Like Notepad) and print it
out. Then, the next time you go the store, make damn sure
that nothing in your shopping cart matches up with any of the brand
names on the list.
* Acuvue *
Actifed *
Ambi *
Aveeno *
Band-Aid *
Benadryl *
Bengay
* Caladryl *
Carefree * Clean &
Clear *
Coach * Coach
Professional
* Conceptrol *
Cortaid *
Delfen *
Desitin *
Dolormin *
E.P.T. *Efferdent
* First-Aid *
Gynol * Healthy
Woman *
Imodium * Johnson's Baby
* Johnson & Johnson Red Cross *
Jontex *
K-Y *
Lactaid * Listerine
* Listermint
* Lubriderm *
Lundens *
Micatin *
Monistat *
Motrin * Motrin Children
* Mylanta *
Nasalcrom *
Neko *
Neosporin *
Neutrogena * Nicoderm
* Nicorette *
Nizoral *
Nu-Gauze *
O.B. *
OneTouch *
Pediacare * Pepcid
* Pepcid AC *
Polysporin *
Ponstan *
Priligy *
Purell *
Quantrel * REACH
* Reactine *
Regaine *
Rembrandt *
Rogaine *
Rolaids * Shower to Shower
* Simply Sleep *
Sinutab *
Splenda * St.
Joseph *
Stayfree * Steri-Pad
* Stim-u-dent *
Sudacare *
Sudafed *
Tucks *
Tylenol * Tylenol Baby
* Tylenol Children *
Unicap *
Visine * Zyrtec
Go one
step more and email this list to all of your friends who smoke and even
your friends who don't smoke, but support personal freedom.
Just select the email option on this little share
thingy.
A
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey released
Thursday showed just under 21 percent of Americans currently smoke
cigarettes. That's a slight increase from the 19.8 percent who say they
smoked the year before.
There's more of
us than there was last year. So how's a self respecting
smoker supposed to react to this latest statistical discharge? One
can't help but notice that the initials of this group (UCD) is almost
OCD, which is quite likely prevalent among their membership.
There they go counting sheep again. Their problem now is that
their control group (their term for human beings) may be acting a
little bit less like sheep lately.

When
president Obama ebulliently signed the S-CHIP bill into being,
the mainstream media ran out and found every guilt-panged smoker they
could find, interviewed them and ran their
stories. Anybody who watched the news surmised that
when the health establishment snapped its fingers and raised the cost
of smoking, the smoking rate would surely decrease by leaps
and bounds over night. Not so apparently. Maybe
we're not as pliable as they first assumed.
In
truth,
the odds of quitting are abysmal and they should have known that going
into it. Lots of people simply have no desire to quit in the
first place, simply because a small but boisterous batch of longevity
loonies demand they do so. Smoking is a pleasure and a
recreation and if you don't believe it just ask Yahoo under which
category a pro-smoking website belongs.
It's
a good sign that people are not kowtowing to the dictates of the Nanny
State any more. Michael Bloomberg barely won a third term as
mayor of New York City despite spending $85 million to buy the
job. Who knows, we may some day cast aside that newly
manufactured slang word - Sheeple
- if this trend persists.
The
same report
stated
that there are 46 million smokers. However, that figure
doesn't square up with standard mathematical practice. The
current population of the U.S. is 307 million. The last time
we checked 21% of that figure is 64 million. They play fast
and loose with their data as we've all seen with their secondhand
smoke nonsense.
Although
it varies
from state to
state, the generally accepted legal age to smoke is eighteen years of
age. That dovetails squarely with the voting age, which means
that there are likely 64 million smokervoters in the country.
Barack Obama received 69 million votes in his victorious
campaign. Voting monolithically (and why not?) the smokers of
America are only a few million votes shy of putting a candidate who
protects their interests into the White House. Isn't that the
idea behind democracy in the first place? It is clear that
anyone who smokes and voted for Obama didn't vote to protect those most
vital of all accessories - their purses and wallets.We're
sorry to harp on endlessly with the statistics, but they started it and
we'll finish it. Our opponents tend to overcount when it
suits their purposes and undercount the strength of our potential power
when it harms their interests. Our next hurdle is to assure
that the Republican party doesn't nominate Tim Pawlenty or Mike
Huckabee in 2012, or we'll be forced to take matters into our own hands
with the Libertarians, the only party, as of this writing, who openly
oppose the War on Tobacco.
Prerequisite Reading
for the Smokervoter: Frank Davis
It
takes a long time to read all of the entries on anyones blog.
That's precisely why we don't have a long list off to the right with
either article titles or categories or archive dates. A
certain
tyranny of choice is overwhelming us all these days. There's just too
much
data to absorb at one glance. Our page is way too long and we
know it, but we really never expected you to read the whole thing in
one sitting anyway. There's a high tech,
hand-holding widget for everything these days, so why don't we put some
newfangled software solution on here that marks your reading
place
for you. Come on now, what did you do before the worldwide web came
along? You mentally took note of what you'd already read and just took
it from there. A few cranial push-ups never hurt anyone.
We've
just finished reading each and every one of
Frank Davis' excellent blog posts and have come to the conclusion that
they should be required reading for any red-blooded
smokervoter.
We've got our favorites, to be sure, and we'll spell them out for you
here, but go ahead and eventually read all of them, they're that
good. They'll steel up your will to overcome the killjoys of
the
world and get out to register and vote and pass along the word,
one smoker at a time, one soft drinker at a time, one Cheeto's addict
at a time.
While
first poking around on his blog a month ago, we'd came across a posting
that included a great bit about vegans and intolerance and re-thinking
ones default
political party affiliation. The
problem was that now we couldn't, for the life of us,
seem to find it again using a search engine. So we just
started reading
every single post he'd written and worked backward until we finally hit
pay dirt and here it is. It is titled "Moving
Left to Right"
and was posted on July 12th of this year. This posting is a
worded equivalent to the graphic created for our article, a hand full
of Page Down keystrokes
from here, that pictures the transition from Haight Ashbury culture to
Salem, Massachusetts took place after
the Summer of Love, oh so long ago. By the way that graphic
and
all the rest are done with good old MS Paint and an old legacy paint
program called MGI PhotoSuite. No irritating, over-priced,
overamped Adobe products (Flash, PDF files,
PhotoShop, etc.) are utilized in the
creation of this website.
"Moving
Left to Right" succinctly describes the strange transformation from
liberal idealism to a fun-killing dogmatism that has overtaken what
were once referred to as Hippies. It all seems straight out
of a
Twilight Zone episode, but it's as real as Newton's gravity and it's
what we're dealing with today. Ask anyone who went through
that
era if they thought that the party of Richard Nixon, with his Law and
Order platform and hard-hat minions, would end up being the party that
now defends personal freedom from an ongoing assault from the Left. Ardent
smoker Rod Serling surely would have appreciated this rather
bizarre political plot twist.
Another
fave of ours is "Awakening the Swarm" posted on Sept 2nd.
This
article really drives home the pent-up hostility we've all been
silently swallowing and eventually calls us to action.
It's
scripted with an extraordinary literary aplomb, as we've come to expect
from our British friends from across the pond. The likening to a swarm
of angry wasps is especially artful. Read it, go out and
register if you haven't already done so, and vote in the next election.
With
his Jul 16th posting Mr. Davis delves into the strange world of
"Obsessive Compulsive Disorder", an affliction that most surely
propels the engine of the anti-smoking locomotive down the tracks.
Step by step and check for check he brilliantly lays it all
out
on the line. This heart-breaking condition is really no joke
and
we emerge feeling a little sorry for our muzzy-brained antagonists in
the
bargain. They really do need to get some help, it's killing them and destroying
our fun at
one fell swoop.

One
of his earliest posts was on June 23rd and it's titled "The
Antismokers". It sums everything up that he eventually
fleshes out
in greater detail which each new article. We've pulled out
our
four favorites here for you, but you could just as well start with the
first one and work your way back to today's latest daisy, they're all
top notch. You could also read our website from the bottom up
if
you so choose to. Here's an old tried-and-true keyboard trick
to
get you started. Press the Ctrl key and tap End. Then
proceed to work the Page
Up
key or the Up Arrow key until you've read your way up to our latest
daisy. Until we find the right widget, you'll just have to
mentally bookmark your way back to the top. Sorry about that.
EXTRA EXTRA: Left Coast
Nanny Mayor Quits California Governor Race.
Another
one bites the dust. Gavin Newsom quits governor race in
California. He cited the need to spend time with his family
and his duties as Mayor for the decision.
Translation: He read the tea leaves and saw that outside his
little Hippie Hell domain of San Francisco people have no desire
whatsoever to turn over simple everyday decisions to faceless
bureaucrats for pre-screening anymore.
He
had Bill Clinton's endorsement, which probably cost him potential
support, and his campaign manager was the openly smoker-hostile Alex
Padilla. Not exactly a recipe for victory if you hope to grab
even 1% of the state's 4.4 million likely smoker voters.
Newsom exhibited
telltale signs of suffering from OCD, not a good thing to put on your
political resume. As Mayor of San Francisco he proposed a
"user fee" tax on cigarettes in order to cover the cost of cleaning the
streets of cast aside butts. He claimed that 25% of street
cleaning debris consisted of cigarette butts. To substantiate
this claim he had a study commissioned to sift through and analyze the
contents of Frisco's daily roadbed rubbish. Just picture that
for a minute folks; goggle-eyed employee, with tweezers in hand,
manically picking out each spent filter while wiping tears of
indignation from the eyes and salivating at the prospect of wagging the
finger of blame at the eco-offenders.
Upon further
investigation the city's own report was found to contain this fateful
sentence casting doubt on the original 25% accusation and we quote -
"Cigarette butts have nearly doubled from 5.6% to 10%."
This
is yet another example of what can only be characterized as scarespeak,
a tactic the ANTI's have traditionally used to get past most people's
built-in common sense filters. The time will come when
anything and everything coming out of the mouths of the Righteous crowd
will automatically go in one ear and out the other.
Keep
in mind that San Francisco is at the center of what is referred to as
the Greater Bay Area, home of Nanncy Pelosi who once said "Every aspect
of our lives must be subjected to inventory".
It is
precisely this attitude toward the masses that is approaching epic fail
mode now. The true reason Nanny Newsom
dropped out is that he didn't have a prayer in
even getting past the first step toward the governorship.
Outside of his beautiful-people enclave in San Francisco this
controlling nutjob is completely passé.
At
present only Republican Governor Arnold, a cigar smoker with a smoking
section tent near his capitol offices, stands between a complete
1984-nightmare-come-true scenario (a product of the Democrat controlled
California Legislature) and the people of the Golden State. A
governor Newsom would have resolved one problem - overpopulation - as
anyone who valued personal freedom would have 'high-tailed it out of
Dodge City' immediately following his inauguration ceremony.
California's
smokervoters need to read up on Meg Whitman, Tom Campbell and Steve
Poizner and form their ultimate decisions from there. Also
pay especially close attention to the State Senator and Assemblyman
races, it is Job#1 to reshape the situation in Sacramento.

Bill Wyman Quits Smoking
Yes,
you heard that right. The greatest bass player in the world's
greatest rock and roll band, at the ripe old age of 73, has quit smoking
his
Dunhill Menthols/St. Moritz (excellent brand) cigarettes as of Oct
25, 2009. Bully for you Bill, and you did it
yourself without
any of the cheater pills or gums. Carrie Nation salutes you,
as do all of the unemployed graphic artists, airbrush guns at the ready
to sterilize all the old photos of you toking away. Seriously
though, according to his doctor, he was on the verge of contracting
emphysema. It was a wise decision.
Please
Bill, don't become an angry, vindictive Reformed Smoker and lecture us
remaining incalcitrant, evil souls on the perils of the sublime leaf.
We know all about it, we kill 50,000 innocent bystanders a
year, we shorten our lives and we cost the treasury untold billions.
Don't join the ranks of New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, or
John McCain or ostensible ex-smoker Barack Obama. They all
really stuck it to us after they quit.
Reformed
smokers come in many styles. Who among us doesn't know at
least one who never really quit, but simply quit buying cigarettes.
Then there are the stealth quitters who go on public record
as having quit, but then you notice an unmistakable herbaceous
aroma in the next room and find that they just had to have one
more, for old times sake, and this is definitely the official last one
they'll ever smoke. Except that it also happened yesterday.
The old Rolling Stone basso
continuo would probably do well to hire on an assistant to
shield the prying eyes of the media from any backsliding spells.
Just
one more thing. Where you stand at the age of 73 on the
sacrosanct average lifespan index of 76.5 years, one has to wonder why
you'd want to withstand the depression, aggravation and pleasure denial
that comes with quitting. It's kind of late in the game.
Just look at Obama. One of the reasons his demeanor
and his polling numbers have turned sour has just got to be a reaction
to cutting off all of that endorphin stimuli.
What's
next? Are we going to read that Keith Richards has cast aside
his old
lawless
ways and joined
the Righteous cause by jettisoning tobacco and becoming a
born-again goody-two-shoes rock and roller? Don't hold your
breath on this one. Keith is one impenitent rogue.
If we do happen to hear that Keith quit, we'll simply throw
in the towel on smokervoter.com and go away in consummate defeat.
We'll start up again as compulsiveperfection.com and be done
with it.
Out of work air brush artists would have a
field day.
Yet
Another Excellent UK Blog
Smokervoters
need to
read a recent blog post
by Frank Davis of
the UK titled "My Head in the Stocks", it's very good. [once again,
promise us you'll hit the Back Button afterward, we've got a bunch of
new stuff here. Same old drill, just work the DOWN ARROW to
get to them]
New
Stuff: Global Warming, Mind
Your Own Business,
Soda Pop Smear Campaign in New York, etc, etc.
In our
newly-sprung fascination with peering into the British version of the
Nanny State, we relied upon Wikipedia for the definition of their
largest third party there - the Lib Dems. Well, we were
misled by it's explanation of this party as being opposed to
Nannyism. Frank Davis corrected us with a nice and concise comment
which
clearly refuted this description. A couple of comments
further down the page yielded this very telling story, an all too
familiar one, regarding smokers in our country who vote Democratic out
of old habit.
Substitute
Democrats for Labour and Republicans for Tories and you'll get the
drift. We're in the process of looking up "toffs".
And
why people keep
voting Labour (and here I'm talking about their hardcore vote (which is
all they have left), the people who vote Labour because they always
have and because their family always has, because Labour is "the Party
of the working man," I'll never understand. The last Labour
administration has done nothing but declare war on the working man for
the last 12 years - banning them from smoking and drinking where they
want; destroying an economy that could actually employ them rather than
giving them State pocket money like children; implementing hundreds of
laws to keep them, "the little people", in their place and run their
small businesses into the ground. Frightening - yet still they vote for
them because the Tories are "toffs." That said, what do the
Conservatives stand for? At present they just seem to be Labour Lite.
Probably the best choice of the three main parties but still somewhat
like accepting a punch in the face than several kicks to the balls.
We couldn't
have said it better, so we won't.
Leg Iron is
on Frank Davis' Link List, so that's a good sign. We're
adding Frank Davis to our own shielded LINK LIST. This kind
of cross communication is just what the doctor ordered if we want to
dismantle the dreadful Nanny State in our lifetimes.
Apparently toffs is English slang for the aristocracy.
Worldwide
Nanny State
Exporting Nouveau Puritanism
The import of some toys
from China that contained lead paint caused quite a stir in
America. Hearings were held and senators were in
shock. To be truthful, the US has exported it's fair share of
toxic constructs in its time. For the past fifteen years
America, the once great beacon of freedom, has been infecting the globe
with Nannyism and while the damage might not show up in the kidneys, it
does tend to lodge in the brain.
When the
current American president visited Russia recently, the Ruskies
couldn't resist getting in a little red jab at America's newfound
authoritarian trend by inviting him to relax a bit and smoke a
cigarette or two in peace. They promised not to arrest or
fine him if he did so. The supposed ex-smoker Obama, of
course, declined the offer and delivered an expected, blase,
holier-than-thou address on the import of groupthink damnation as an
effective deterrent to teen smoking.
As we've
mentioned here before we trace the advent of the Nanny State back to
its tap root - Day One of the Clinton administration. Much to
the consternation of millions of baby-boom voters looking to the
Clintons for an end to cannabis prohibition (and fooled by old
pictures of hippie girl Hillary and a bearded Bill),
Hillary instead announced that, henceforth, there
would
be no smoking allowed on White House grounds. Forthwith the attorney
general
from the state of Mississippi, right next door to the first couple's
home base in Arkansas, took his cue from the new prez and launched his
landmark billion-dollar lawsuit against Big Tobacco. As would
be logically expected, the tobacco companies then passed the collection
plate around to its customers and tobacco prices spiked
dramatically. Bill Clinton, the Machiavellian genius,
assessed the fallout at a mere 20% dent to his ratings and relaxed by
chewing on a cigar.
In place of an
anticipated libertine tilt to the political scene, the Clinton's
instead delivered a tyrannical, new mixed-up sort of freedom which
gradually became known as Liberal Fascism. The public was now
free from corporate parsimony, and free from non-organic vegetable
peddlers and free from incorrect speech and free from motorcyclists
without helmets and...(drum roll)...free from Joe Camel's Evil Tobacco
Adverts.
They should have known
better, in reality San Francisco went from Haight-Ashbury to Salem,
Mass. in one
scant summer's passing. Doctrinaire hippie health food stores
sprang up everywhere and in short order, so much as chomping down a Big
Mac put
you in the out-crowd with the new organic Aquarians.
By the end of
their eight year governance America was a changed place. The
sight of Johnny Carson interviewing a guest while he smoked a cigarette
was now viewed as an outrage against humanity. There was no
more happy-go-lucky, live-and-let-live country left after they were
through with things. Whining and sniveling became de rigueur across
the land.
And then the
country that brought you Elmer Gantry set off on a evangelical tour of
the planet with the goal of making the world safe for do-gooders and
compulsive perfectionism. Smoking bans spread to Europe, Asia
and now even the Middle East, where smoking rates of 70% are
common. There are reports though that pending smoking
legislation in Iraq is going over like a lead
balloon. Pubs and eateries in Scotland, Ireland, Wales and
Great Britain began closing their doors as a result. From the
authors of smokervoter.com we offer our apology - this certainly wasn't
our idea.
By the way, the
lead poisoned toys from China claimed not one life, while the death
toll to personal freedom from American exports of the Righteous Way is
now in the billions.
That being
said, we'd like to announce the internationalization of our little
website. This is a result of our exposure to a blog we came
upon by the name of Underdogs Bite Upwards by a gifted Scottish writer
who goes by the moniker of Leg Iron. This guy is good and we do mean
good.
Make sure you
read his Oct 25th, 2008 post on smoking and "the Righteous".
This posting says it all. The title is Invasion of the
Righteous. 8. Incremental Steps. When you're
done reading this installment,
start backtracking to the start on Oct 21, 2008. This is
some really good reading.
Here's a teaser:
"The total smoking ban in any covered public space was only a matter of
time after that. As is the eventual ban
on smoking in open public areas (already in effect in hospital
grounds),
the ban on smoking in your own car and then in your own home. Tobacco
is not an illegal substance
and I bet it will never be. It'll always be legal to buy it. You'll
just have to row six miles offshore to smoke it."
Here's some more:
"The Righteous don't get their way by rioting. They incite others to
riot, where appropriate, and then calmly suggest means to control
such behaviour. Usually by giving the rioters what
they want. So if smokers riot, will we
get our one smoking room per company back again? Of
course not. We are not a
Righteous-approved group."
"The Righteous achieved the current state of the smoking ban, and will
achieve its extension, by incremental
means over a period of years. Start by the banning of smoking in one or
two areas
within an organisation. Extend until only a few areas, then one area,
remains. Restrict
the times at which smoking is allowed in
that one area. Close it completely. Then repeat in
other
organisations. Then extend it to cover all public spaces. Then extend
into private premises and finally into homes."
"Non-smokers, and especially anti-smokers, will shrug and say `So What?
It doesn't apply to me.’
There's a
reason that when you go to college in America to learn how to write
they call the class English 101, as in England. Chaucer and
Stevenson and Orwell
and Shakespeare all hailed from across the
pond. We might be overgeneralizing here a bit, but there are
two things the UK absolutely excels at: guitar playing (think Jeff
Beck) and literature. Drop in on one of their pro-smoking
forums like Freedom2Choose.org and just sample the posts - they're
absolutely amazing in their detail and flair. We here at
smokervoter.com are not worthy. We thought we wrote pretty
well but go over to Leg Iron's blog and read his take on the Righteous
(read: Nannies) and you probably won't bother bookmarking this site
anymore.
Seriously
though folks, the erosion of freedom has become a worldwide phenomena
and it's in metastasis mode at the present time. Voters
worldwide therefore need to reverse the trend and a good place to start
is with the smoking voters mobilising into a base upon which the magic
number of 51% can be achieved.
Now for a
little revelation on this site's navigation and our no-links set
up. There is a Links section to this site. We
stealthfully put it about two-thirds of the way down the page so you
have to read a bunch of our stuff before you get to it. Hey,
it's only human nature to jump around schizophrenically all over the
net, we do it too. They say people's attention span is
dwindling to near zero because of the web. Anyway if you want
to get to Leg Iron's splendid blog click right
here
and just promise
us you'll hit the back button sometime afterwards. We're
worthy.
As the debate on
National Healthcare approaches it's grand finale, the main sticking
point centers on how best to spread the risk and costs around fairly
and effectively. Creating a wide risk pool is one of the
basic tenets of insurance. Up until now this is how it's been
done, with tobacco as the designated product:

Global Warming and
Tobacco Smoke
Leg Iron
alert: The brilliant blogger from across the pond has posted
a couple of new articles that are must-reads on two topics: Global
Warming and the potential voting power
we the people possess.
There are
parallels to be sure between the global warming people and the
anti-smoking people and now the fatty food nags. We've
pointed out in a prior article here that we're surprised we smokers
aren't being blamed for global warming due to the fact that billions of smokers exhale
spent tobacco smoke into the atmosphere on a daily basis.
It would
actually benefit us if they did calculate and publish the daily
aggregate output of tobacco smoke into the atmosphere, thereby
highlighting the infinitesimal amount involved. As Leg
Iron adroitly points out in his entirely rational rebuttal to the
no-solution solutions the Kyoto Luddites always seem to advance - even
returning to
the horse-and-buggy days won't solve any
problems. If you think cigarette smoke stinks, just imagine the
stench from all of that manure being fanned around by green power wind
farms. It's all just too crazy.
It would
eliminate the need to buy those trusty old Mexican Horseshit
Cigarettes.
And yes they really do exist.
Presumably the
folks that work at the various tobacco research/hate factories such as
the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, ASH, the University of San
Francisco Medical School and such don't all live within
walking/bicycling distance of their job sites. They no doubt
hop into their cars and spew second-hand carbon monoxide out the
tailpipes and into the air that we all must breathe. Now we
don't mind if they want to drive cars, we just don't want to breathe in their filthy auto exhaust in the process.
Does this sound familiar?
Please don't
give us that do-good bullshit
about smoking being a choice while driving a car is a
necessity. You could replace your auto with a horse-and-buggy
rig; they're still readily available. [come back and click
this link after
reading on]
Leg Iron goes
on to point out that if we continue down this road to nowhere,
mapped out by the false alarmists, of forever voting them into power, we'll
all suffer the self-induced consequences. The rational
solution to this is, of course, forming an alliance of the electorate
in sufficient numbers to change course.
The Righteous
(love that term) among us are quite possibly the strongest mobilizing
force there is going. They should reread How to Win Friends and
Influence People. They're gradually going to
target and ostracize themselves a majority
of the voters.
Yes, but will it fly with the voters?
The continuing saga over
what kind of healthcare plan will emerge from
the hallowed deliberative chambers of congress has put the focus
on some oft-forgotten assorted wings of the two major
parties. The Republicans
have always had what is known as a moderate wing. Olympia
Snowe,
the lone Republican yea vote on the Finance Commitee bill is the latest
poster child for the moderates. Radio heavyweight Rush
Limbaugh
derisively refers to this division of the GOP as the
Bluebloods. The Democrats have what is commonly referred to
as its
conservative wing, labeled the Blue Dogs. The name is reportedly derived from a tendency of its member to turn blue in reaction to some of the uber-left ideas advanced from the opposite tip of the wing. Out on the inner
fringes
of both parties you'll find an azure hue, this much is known.
This set us to pondering upon the various wings within the tobacco
control establishment. After some vigorous debate the best we
could come up with were the Segregationist and the Prohibitionist
factions.
If you overlay a
good-cop/bad-cop
scenario here, the Segregationist's
role is that of the good-cop. Yeah, they'll let you go ahead
and
smoke so long as you don't smoke anywhere (as in miles) near
them. Stay away from their buses and lunch counters and
everything will be hunky-dory. On the other hand are the
Prohibitionists (bad-cop) who
want tobacco wiped off the face of the earth. They harken
back to
the good old days of Carrie Nation and the wildly successful
Prohibition Era.
The California Sin Tax King, Alex Padilla will allow you to smoke as
long as you keep your (long) distance and promise to donate money to
his favorite cause - The California State Treasury. He's what
is
known as a New Segregationist. Then you've got the
Prohibitionist faction that
wants to outlaw tobacco all together.
One such Prohibitionist is a millionaire Democrat/ Advertising Exec
(Booooo, despicable occupation, we know what we want to buy, thank you)
by the name of Donny Deutsch. There's a political talk show
on
CNBC called "Morning Joe". Donny appeared on this show with
his
simple solution for healthcare and here is an excerpt. The
co-quoted Mika is
Zbigniew Brzezinski's (Democrat apparatchik) daughter. We shy
away from cut-and-paste content here, but here goes a rare exception.
"Appearing
on Morning Joe today, Deutsch offered a two-part plan for health care:
1. Make the rich pay for it: "I'm an extremist.
I'm for redistribution of wealth."
2. "Outlaw tobacco."
DONNY DEUTSCH: I'm an extremist. I'm for
redistribution of wealth. And basically there's no reason why people
making over a million bucks a year can't pay nine-thousand bucks a year
in extra taxes to save lives.
And a bit later . . .
DEUTSCH: The real hard answer is outlaw
cigarettes
and save $100 billion a year and that pays for health care.
That predictably appealed to Mika Brzezinski, a Big Mommy government
fan who'd like to confiscate everything from coffin nails to curly
fries.
MIKA BRZEZINSKI: There you go: that's my
answer.
DEUTSCH: You want the real hard answer?
We still sell a product that we kill ourselves with.
BRZEZINSKI: Thank you.
DEUTSCH: Outlaw tobacco tomorrow, you
solve the health care problem.
JOE SCARBOROUGH: Actually, you don't
solve the health care problem.
DEUTSCH: You pay for it. $100
billion--that's what cigarettes cost in health care."
This guy threatened to run for New York City mayor at one
time.
We don't make this stuff up folks: There's a bio about Donny
on a
website that goes by the URL of: perfectpeople.net
Prohibition and Segregation. Why anyone in their right mind
would
want to resuscitate these two relics of history's trash bin is beyond
the pale.
What strange birds the ANTI's are indeed. Most
political
organizations would run full speed away from any reference to these two
tags. It's a wonder, in the so-called modern era, that they
manage
to get off the ground at all with these disgraced twin props
serving as their lift. They somehow manage to keep right on
flying high above the fray.
Come to think of it, it seems just a little unfair to use the bird, one
of Mother Nature's most unconstrained creations, as a symbol of any
governmental body.
Smokers can spot a nicotine nazi from a mile away. There's
just something about the messianic eyes, or maybe it's the sappy
smile but, we do know one when we see one.
Here we go soda
drinkers;
they're starting in on you now. It's old hat to
we smoking
devils, so let us clue you into something - you'll get used to it, and
soon it'll be like water off a ducks back to you. Health
fanatics
tend to repeat themselves a lot; it's a typical symptom of
the
OCD that most of them are afflicted with. That and they love
to
count things, and measure things and study things endlessly.
Prepare yourself for all sorts of scary
statistics
predicting your eminent demise tomorrow. When you awaken to
yet
another day and find you're luckily still alive, open up the fridge,
pop the top on your favorite soft drink and savor the indescribably
reassuring sound of effervescence in action.
This is a PSA from the New York City Department of Health and (get
this) Mental Hygiene. Mental Hygiene? As in
maintaining a
clean mindset, as in groupthink, as in George Orwell nailed it right on
the head.
Can there be a less fulfulling occupation than that of a PSA producer?
Your end product, after all the storyboards and late night
brainstorming sessions, is utterly and completely ignored by 98% of
your audience. You waste so much time and energy and MONEY and
nobody cares or listens or gets the message. Human beings
aren't as malleable as your latest study said they'd be.
We first gazed upon this disgusting public service announcement at the Gothamist
web site while doing an Ixquick search for "Audrey Silk". We
definitely like her. She is one cool smokers' rights fighter
from
New York City. She's an ex-cop who once ran for mayor on the
Libertarian ticket. Audrey is the founder of NYC C.L.A.S.H.,
an organization that
fights for restaurant owners' rights and against smoking bans and for
personal liberty. The name stands for Citizens Lobbying
Against Smoker Harassment. We say support her all the way.
This soda pop campaign bears the fingerprints of two major anti-smoking
nuts we've highlighted before on this site. Specifically the
New
York Health Department was Thomas Frieden's baby until president
Obama named him to head the Center for Disease Control.
This
is yet another indication that in Barack Obama we've got a vindictive,
proverbial ex-smoker hypocrite in the Oval Office now. If you
smoke and voted for him, you lost. And the other perpetrator
is
Michael Bloomberg, the ruler of Gotham City.
Supreme NYC Nanny Mayor Bloomberg is seeking an unprecedented third
term. He's the East Coast version of San
Francisco's rotten
nanny mayor Gavin Newsom. What is it about old coastal cities
that seem to attract stifling overprotective regulation?
Check
out any electoral map and you'll see that, were it not for the
mega-population centers on both coasts, the Democrats would be nowhere.
The article that featured this PSA really got the sparks flying in the
Comments section. You had the usual narcissistic health
dweebs
defending the health department and talking up their effectiveness.
These are the people that could never understand why they had
no
friends and were always the perennial last-chosen for schoolyard team sports,
after hectoring their classmates for coming in late from recess period.
Anyway, one of these posters by the name of Pipsy (perfect absolutely
perfect) let loose with the old 'you can smoke and drink pops all you
want, as long as I don't have to foot the bill for your medical bills'
yada yada yada - snooze.
Audrey Silk then stepped in and let loose with this retort.
It was poetry in motion.
"The cost argument doesn't wash. Let's see, according to that argument,
"I'm footing the bill for smokers!" "I'm footing the bill for the
obese!" "I'm footing the bill for [fill in the blank]!" Before you know
it, apparently, according to busybodies who seem to think how other
people choose to live is any of their business or for them to judge,
we'll eventually find the ONE person in America who's been that PERFECT
guy who's footing the bill for everyone else. Because apparently NO ONE
(but that one guy) pays for themselves. And everybody BUT that one guy
never gets sick. That's right, he's the one who has lived on soy and
water and lived forever. That IS what the healthists believe, no? That
they can "prevent deaths" if you just live without [insert list here].
Pipsy, are you that one guy?"
That got our journalistic juices flowing for a future article.
We're gonna' find that ONE GUY if it's the last thing we do
and
write a feature on him. Congratulations Audrey, you nailed Pipsy
to
the wall.
We're in the process of adding Audrey's website to our stealthily
hidden LINKS LIST so find it and check out her site. Look for
a
graphic roughly three-quarters of the way down the page that looks like
this:
Bloomberg is attempting to change some laws around so he can run for a
third term. If he succeeds in getting on the ballot, this
would
be a perfect test case for the unsung voting power of smokers (and now
soda pop drinkers) as they exercise their will at the polls and VOTE
HIM OUT. His opponent is Democrat Bill Thompson so you'll have to go
against your natural instinct in this case. Frankly, with his
anti-property rights record we fail to see why Bloomberg bothers
running as a Republican. Smokervoters would really need to get
super-monolithic on this one with near 100% cohesion to win, but who
knows, we can dream can't we?
You
are looking at the sociopathic face of a Nanny State legislator,
probably the worst offender in the state of California, one Alex
Padilla. He represents the 20th State Senate District, which
is
centered at Pacoima, California. He is a political hack of
the
worst kind, a professional office holder and surprise, surprise - he's
a Democrat. He's going to run Gavin Newsom's 2010
gubernatorial
campaign. He won his last election campaign in 2006 by a
55%-44%
margin over another Democrat.
Gavin Newsom
is the Mayor
of the worst Nanny City in existence - San Francisco. Newsom
needs to be defeated in his bid for Governor - he's a nanny politician
of the first degree and he too, needs to be shown the door.
Let's
hope Padilla fares better than another campaign manager of
Mayor
Gavin's did, who quit after discovering an affair between Newsom and
his wife. The Mayor then went to into rehab for a drinking
problem. Padilla's apparently okay with all of this but, he
wants
you to put that cigarette out and stop drinking those evil soda pops. Newsom wants to add his own city tax on sweetened drinks, so
if both of these guys succeed in their missions, the lucky residents of
Frisco will soon be paying a hefty price for liquid refreshment.
Despite
crooner Tony
Bennett's overly romanticized ode to the City by the Bay, the place is an
Orwellian nightmare. Where once roamed libertine,
do-your-own-thing hippies you'll now find NO
THIS and NO
THAT
signs every five feet. There are laws against literally
everything and anything in San Fransisco and the whole surrounding Bay
Area for that matter. They should issue living permits to all
residents there replete with 500-page manifestos detailing exactly how
to maintain total appropriate behavior compliance at all times. Speaker of the House
Nancy Pelosi hails from the Bay Area, enough said.
Padilla
might think he's
indestructible, but he's not. He can be voted out of office
and
sent packing if the smokervoters in this district join up with the soda
drinkers and unite to vote him out. The crushing blow to the
Nanny State would be illustrative to all future control freaks who
aspire to tell us all how to live our lives and tax everything we seem
to enjoy out of existence. Really, is this what we want from
our
government - Big Mean Mother?
As much as
we hate
statistics (Padilla is a false statistics nut) and social engineering
math let's take a look at just how we will dis-elect Mr.
Padilla.
He's angered 20% of the voters in his district by sponsoring
legislation to add $1.50 to each pack of cigarettes. He wants
to
add 12 cents to each can of Coke; this translates to 72 cents per
six-pack, which really means 78 cents because the sales tax (which they
just raised) comes on top of the sin tax. It's safe to say at
least half of the people in his district and probably more will be
enraged after they watch the display at the checkout counter record
this new assault on their disposable income. That's a recipe
for
defeat - 20% and 50%+ of the electorate, mad as hell and ready to turn
him out.
Incidentally,
just to
illuminate how bad it could wind up being for avid soft drink fans, if
in the future they act to tax soda pop at the same rate ounce-for-ounce
that is now in effect on tobacco, a single 12 oz can of Coke could cost
you $18.60. Think that's impossible? Think again,
the nanny
state is accelerating it's healthy American agenda like a railroad
locomotive rolling down the tracks with no brakes.
Furthermore,
why shouldn't it be taxed at the same rate as tobacco, isn't obesity
now the biggest killer of all? What's good for the goose is
good
for the gander. Only you can stop it by registering to vote,
showing up at the polls and voting these clowns out of office.
A combined
voting bloc of
angry smokers and soda drinkers combined with the 44% of people who
voted against him in the last election should do the trick.
And
what a fine trick this would be! Think of the ramifications
of
ridding the state of this supreme nanny legislator. He 's a
powerful man who needs to be shown the door. He was on the LA
City council and was even the council president for a time.
He's
a lifetime political hack who never tires of micro-managing the
everyday lives of the people; we need to defeat this guy once and for
all. The message would be a devastating blow to those who
seek to
further segregate people from one another and sin tax them to the poor
house.
By the way,
here's what the crime rate in Pacoima looks like.
Violent
crime there is almost three times the national average, but Padilla
chooses to take on the non-violent 'criminals' who smoke and drink
Pepsi instead. Oh, and we almost
forgot: he wants to force fast food
restaurants to spend millions putting up those worthless calorie
content signs that nobody bothers to read - honestly, people just want
their Big Macs. What a
guy! Just who you want to
lead you if
you happen to reside in his district. Join forces and VOTE
HIM
OUT!!!
The large
rallies against
Obama's cumbersome health plan for us all are a good sign that things
could be changing. And we're not talking his much vaunted change
menu here. Lots of placards basically saying "We Don't Trust
You"
were in evidence. Obama gets it, he's no dummy. In
one of
his many interviews he correctly noted that the uproar is not a racial
thing, it's a distrust of large government programs that's got people
worked up into a lather. They've seen what can happen
vis-a-vis
the war on smokers and, with obesity now in the gunsights of the health
police, they know they're the next convenient target.
Whoops!
Our
apologies on the lack of dilligent research regarding Barack
Obama's tobacco stance prior to the election
It's a
little bit too late now, but we blew it. We do our
level
best to scour the net and research the topics presented here.
Apparently we failed to use the right magic combination of
words
and + signs and - signs while checking out Barack Obama's
tobacco
legislation record. It was right there in front of our nose
and we
missed it.
He seemed
like such a likable
and intelligent fellow during the campaign that we gave him the benefit
of the doubt. As we've stated here before we don't believe
there
is anything inherently bad about leaning to the left of the political
spectrum. A pendulous motion in both directions by the two
parties on the center has served to make America the great place it is.
We quote and
embellish. Senator Obama's legislative record in
the tobacco control arena is extensive.
As a
Senator, Obama joined nine U.S. Senate colleagues in calling on
former President Bush to send to the Senate for ratification the
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, the world's first public
health treaty.
This is bad,
really bad. There are sovereignty issues
involved here that he comes down on the wrong side of. This
is just what we need, Worldwide Nicotine Nazi forces. The UN
is ineffective in quelling warfare between nations, possibly because
they're sidetracked by making sure no one anywhere on earth has to
experience a wayward whiff of tobacco smoke.
As a
Senator, Obama was one of the original cosponsors providing the
Food and Drug Administration with authority to regulate tobacco
products and tobacco marketing.
Here's a
timeline:
- 2005: Obama Voted To Create The Display Of Tobacco Products
Act - The Display of Tobacco Products Act, among other things, provides
that it is unlawful to sell, offer for sale, give away, or display
tobacco products for sale at any location where the consumer can
acquire those products through self-service. [93rd GA, HB
318, 3R P 57-0-0, 5/7/03; Session Sine Die, 1/11/05]
This is the law that both smokers and non-smokers alike
detest because when you buy some smokes, the checkout line suddenly
grinds to a halt as the checker has to stop and unlock the product or
walk over to another area. A perfect example of how Nanny
government is just plain stupid and annoying as hell.
-
2004: Obama Voted To Restrict The Display Of Tobacco
Advertisements - Creates the Display of Tobacco Products Act.
Provides that single packs of cigarettes must be sold from behind the
counter or in an age restricted area in which minors under 18 years of
age are not permitted access unless accompanied by an adult or in a
sealed display case and all other tobacco products must be in the line
of sight of the cashier or other employee of the store. [93rd GA, HB
4302, 3R P 58-0-0, 5/13/04; PA 93-0886, 8/9/04]
- 2003: Obama Co-Sponsored Bill To Use Money From Tobacco
Settlement Recovery Fund Creates the Tobacco Settlement Recovery Fund
Uses Act. Among other things, provides for a comprehensive tobacco use
prevention and reduction program, to be administered by the Department
of Public Health. Under a separate program, provides for grants from
the Department of Public Health to free medical clinics and
not-for-profit health clinics. Under a third program, provides for
grants from the Department of Public Health to local health departments
to achieve local priorities. Provides for a biomedical research
program, to be administered by the Illinois Board of Higher Education.
[92nd GA, HB 2001, Session Sine Die, 1/7/03]
This is one of these bills that provides free money to the
ANTI's, ripped off from the very people who end up the target of their
government-subsidized hatred. Annoying and insulting to the
max, and as a smoker himself, he had to have been aware of
this. This is how those aforementioned beard-scratching
college professors get their funding.
- 2003: Obama Sponsored Bill To Make Illegal Alcoholic
Cigarette Wrapping Paper. Obama voted to amend the Tobacco
Accessories and Smoking Herbs Control Act which states that a person
may not knowingly sell, yada yada any cigarette wrapping paper,
impregnated or dipped in, alcoholic liquor or
honey, or both. [92nd GA; HB 5909; 2002; Session Sine Die 1/7/03]
Goodbye Swisher Sweets and Rum-soaked Crooks. Those we're so
tasty. This is stupid, stupid, stupid and accomplishes
exactly zero. If we'd only known. Definite
prescience deficit on our part - mucho sorry.
- 2003: Obama Sponsored Bill To Increase Minimum Age To Buy
Tobacco. Obama voted to increase the age at which a person may lawfully
buy cigarettes or other tobacco products from 18 to 19. [93rd GA; HB
1383; 2003; Referred to Rules 3/21/03, Alternate co-sponsor added
4/10/03].
Wowie zowie, that extra year is really going to make a big
difference. What an ineffectual senator the future president
was proving to be. Pure junk legislation done so that he
could appear as a big, bad tobacco industry fighter to the voters back
home in the district.
- 2002: Obama Supported Increase In Cigarette Tax - SJR
reported, "Sen. Obama said, 'A 75-cent-a-pack increase in the state's
cigarette tax would help relieve the state's budget problems and cut
down on the number of Illinoisans who smoke...'
We caught this one!!
- 2001: Obama Sponsored Bill Prohibiting Bidi Cigarette
Distribution. Obama voted to criminalize the distribution of
"Bidi cigarettes," which contain tobacco that is wrapped in temburni or
tendu leaf or a similar substance, and do not contain a smoke filtering
device to another person. [91st GA, SB 1583, 2000; Referred to rules
2/1/00; Session Sine Die, 1/9/01.
Bidi fans, he's the guy to blame!!!
- 2001: Obama Voted For Bill That Taxed Snuff - In 2001,
Obama voted for a bill that amends the Tobacco Products Tax Act to
define snuff and impose a tax of 37 cents per ounce of snuff. [92nd GA,
SB 449, 3R P; 48-3-3, 3/29/01]
Illinois Snuff tobacco fans, he's the guy to blame!!!
- 2001: Obama Sponsored Bill To Tax Out-Of-State Tobacco
Distributors. Obama voted to designate out-of State
distributors as subject to the Tobacco Products Tax Act of 1995 when
they sell tobacco products to retailers and consumers in Illinois.
[92nd GA; SB 0853; 2001; PA 92-0231; 8/2/01].
If you smoke and voted the Democratic ticket in the last election
thinking that Barack Obama, as a smoker, might go easy on you, you
thought wrong. Your next opportunity to correct this mistake
will come in 2010. In the meantime study up on candidates
from the Green Party, Peace and Freedom or maybe even the
Libertarians. Stay tuned on this last choice, we're putting
together an article on where Democrats fit into the Libertarian Party
scheme.
SUPPORT FOR THE NANNY STATE: DELUSIONS OF GRANDEUR
No question
seems too
trivial or inane for the pollsters to ask the American
people.
They range from earth shattering polls related to American Idol voting
right on through the whole gamut of other pressing social
issues.
We searched the web high and low and, for the life of us, we couldn't
find a single poll which asked the simple question "Do you favor the
Nanny State?" Our gut feeling is that the minuscule results
in
the affirmative column of such a poll would reflect a pattern that most
of us know from grade school classroom politics - very few people like
do-gooders. Even fewer people like politicians who sponsor
and
vote for nanny state regulations regardless of whether they can be
somehow justified in the name of saving lives or protecting the
children. Being treated by the government like errant
children
annoys the vast majority of people to no end.

The raucous
debate over
health care reform unfolding at town hall meetings seems to have caught
some major Nannies and their Democrat backers off guard. The
issue of death panels, real or imagined, has moved stage center as a
fear factor among the disputants. What is becoming clear is
that
there is simmering distrust and apprehension towards a largely
unelected health fascist faction of individuals setting standards of
acceptable behavior governing modern life in America. As any
smoker will tell you, disciplinary dictates typically start when a
panel of health experts meet, exchange dubiously collected and collated
data, and then recommend final solutions that quickly morph into real
actionable public policy. The public has grown weary of the
growing intrusion of government into their daily lives through the back
door of a big catch-all category we'll just call public
health.
When you open the floodgates you can't tell the water where to go.
Public
health is a huge
umbrella which can cover simple everyday lifestyle choices such as
what's for dinner or whether to reach for a soft drink to quench ones
thirst on a sweltering summer afternoon. How these seemingly
innocuous personal decisions have suddenly become some faceless
bureaucrat's business has people dumbfounded and reacting with
understandable anger.
A busybody
gossip column
writer from Down Under recently took actor Russell Crowe to task
because he was observed, while bicycling with his personal trainer,
puffing on a cigarette and chowing down on three tacos and a soft
drink. Most people justifiably ask themselves "This is a
topic
for discussion?" Since when and by whose dictates is smoking
a
Marlboro and eating fatty foods some kind of public crime?
Seriously, who needs these people and their omnipotent opinions
anyway? Crowe challenged the reporter to accompany him on a
subsequent bike ride and left her in the dust eating her ill conceived
words.
President
Obama's poll
numbers are trending downward and Nancy Pelosi's permanently
plastered-on vacant smile is wearing thin on folks. The
racing
forward march of Nanny State government that has accompanied the
Democrats return to power is taking its toll on their political
prospects for the 2010 elections. People were so fed up with
George Bush and the Republicans that they forgot what life in a
politically correct Democrat political system had to offer.
When
the people who brought you the DMV and the Post Office ask you to trust
them with your life, high anxiety is sure to follow. Although
the
distinction between the two main parties may grow more obscure by the
year it can basically be summed up as such; the Dem's like
big
government solutions, the GOP doesn't.
If you've
been following
this site for any time you'll note we've covered this topic many times
in the past. We mentioned the peacock effect
of fluffing up ones
feathers to appear much larger and powerful than reality.
We've
mentioned how unwitting but still blustery Rob Reiner is steadily
losing ground on all of his latest ballot propositions since sticking it
to California's smokers with his infamous Proposition 10 back in
1998. At most, maybe a scant fifteen percent of the populace
truly
favor a Nanny State in which the government micromanages each and every
aspect of daily life and interjects itself into the most mundane of
personal decisions on a regular basis.
So why does
the Nanny
State seem to be preceding ahead at full steam when so many seem to
detest it? Part of the answer might be a lack of the polling
question that started this article. A lead story on the
nightly news shows dissecting the merits of the Nanny State might get the ball
rolling. This would capture the attention of political
handlers
and at least open up their brainstorming sessions to the idea that
there might be a price to pay with the voters if their candidate is seen as favoring
the present course of social engineering action.
We've been
saying all
along here at smokervoter that a combined voting bloc of smokers and
freedom loving non-smokers can and will stop the Nanny Government dead
in its tracks. A good place to start will be the upcoming
2010
election cycle. Barack Obama and the Democratic leadership in
congress have come out in full support of the Nanny State
with
increased pressure on smokers and are now toying with the
idea of soda taxes to boot. They need to be given the boot
themselves and in a dramatic fashion. A crushing defeat at
the
polls will reverse the momentum and restore sanity to the political
landscape. It'll pluck some of those peacock feathers in the process.
"Tax soda pop to fight fat, US
health officials say"
Thomas Frieden, the head of
the Center for Freedom Control and Prevention just doesn't get it and
he never will. After anonymously and capriciously altering
the lifestyles and bank account balances of cigarette puffing New
Yorkers based on his hallowed calculations he's out to repeat this
performance on Coke and Pepsi drinkers. The people of this
country are sick and tired of his statistics, damn
statistics! Who appointed this guy God and when will he just
go away and quit bugging us to death with his health nagging and
freedom-sapping directives.
What Frieden doesn't realize is that what he represents is what most
people are now reaching the tipping point on and rejecting wholesale -
a Taliban-like obsession with health purity that's about as popular
here as it is in Pakistan. His whole train of thought, which
basically says if people enjoy anything it should be taxed out of
existence, just goes against the grain of what makes America,
well America.
In these troubled times especially, when we're questioning everything
that once seemed normal as somehow flawed by design, people are longing
for the simplicity of the past. They remember a time when
life wasn't one big spreadsheet result of x-number of this causing
y-number of that. Who really cares and who's counting anyway, and why
are you constantly counting everything? Isn't counting
everything a symptom of OCD? Howard Stern once suffered from
OCD and was cured with a lot of hard therapy. Do you think he
would want to go back to his old compulsive ways, we doubt
it. He's having a lot more fun now. He's laughing
again and all the way to the bank, it should be noted.
The point is this; it's just no fun at all being a perfect scientific
specimen of health. We happen to like our flaws thank
you. A lot of our heroes lived fast and died young, but had a
great time in the bargain. That's the American way,
Tom. We'd rather be James Dean, John Wayne and Elvis Presley
than some flawless dweeb cocooned away in the fetal position, hiding
out from all of the bad influences life has to offer up.
Measuring everything against some boring longevity gauge isn't what we
want. We want to live a little before we die.
He brags about reducing smoking by driving the price of cigarettes sky
high in New York, but fails to absorb the fact that he caused a lot of
economic hardship and angst for a lot of smokers in the
process. Once again he throws out his obsessive numbers of a
25% reduction here and a 50% reduction there without the slightest
mention of the fact that he's created a quasi hate movement in the
process. There can be little argument that Frieden has
demonized smokers to the point of their assuming second class citizen
status in today's society. He's setting his sights on the
obese and soda pop drinkers next. Soon no one is going to
want to be seen downing a Coca-Cola in public.
Nazi Germany got out of hand in an incremental fashion and we're seeing
a similar mission creep sneaking in with the healthy nation agenda
Frieden and his ilk keep tirelessly pushing and upping the ante
on. The role of the medical industry has been undergoing a
radical shift in the last couple of decades. People go to
their doctors for healing and relief - not for painful and punitive
edicts. The family doctor should stick to the smocks and
stethoscopes and drop the handcuffs, billy clubs and side arms.
There's an undercurrent of resentment forming and Frieden and company
will soon find themselves in the concrete bunker with the troops
outside the door. The people have had enough of being told
what to do and what not to do. Ron Paul is gaining in
popularity while control freaks are losing ground. He also
happens to be a doctor, the kind of doctor most people would
prefer. Freedom trumps harsh, mandated compliance every time
in this fine republic, as incumbents caught off guard will soon see.
Frieden et al., have succeeded in making the 20% of us who smoke and
now the 2/3rds who are obese into societal pariahs. That's
generally not very good practice. When you make all but a
small cadre of citizens unacceptable you tend to end up in a little
concrete bunker somewhere with the rabble outside hunting you down
for retribution.
Health officials need to recognize that they are not public
officials. They have no business setting the parameters by
which we live our lives. They can scream and cajole to their
hearts content, but when they cross the line into becoming the local
sheriff, all bets are off.
Oh, Say Can You See
A Modest Melodious Proposal:
A Second National Anthem.

The stadium is packed in anticipation of the Superbowl
kick-off. It's time for the National Anthem. At one
time it was a good bet that one out of five in attendance smoked, but
now with most team organizations bowing to the pressure exerted on them
by busybody health lobbyists there are none. Who wants to
spend four hours at a nail-biting, lead-changing football game while
going crazy wishing you could relieve the tension with a nice
smoke? Here is yet another public gathering smokers have been
segregated from by a new super-sanitary version of the old
klan. There are different tactics involved now but there's
the same objectives and result, the exclusion of people deemed unworthy
to rub elbows with.
For your half-time snack there will be no Cokes (corn fructose sugar),
no milk (it's for cows only), no beer (too much fun) and no hotdogs
(junk food). Could we interest you in a tall glass of pomegranate juice
and perhaps some brown rice topped off with a sampling of organic vegetables from
Michelle Obama's White House garden?
The entertainer steps up to the microphone, does a last minute inner
cranial check of the lyrics and belts out "Oh say can you see...
If she manages to avoid the national anthem jinx and get through all of
the remaining lyrics unscathed she'll conclude with ..."o'er the land
of the free, and the home of the brave."
Unfortunately more and more people are starting to find the 'land of
the free' part not exactly ringing true anymore. This is the
age of nouveau-puritan insanity and it is spreading from the Middle
East with its grim religiosity, to the amber waves of grain in modern
day America. State mandated perfectionism has run amok and no
one is quite sure why, or what can be done to reverse it. The
people stuck at home watching the Superbowl on the television
because they can't smoke at the game may very well hold the key.
They're potentially sixty million strong and if they all registered, and
all turned
out to vote, and voted in a bloc it would change everything.
Now merge them with the disgruntled Superbowl attendees' stuck with no
beers and Michelle's vegetables and it's goodbye Nanny State, not even
close.
Here's an idea: let's add a second national anthem to the
mix. After the applause dies out from the old standby, let's
have the singer tear into "Mind Your Own Business", the classic country
western tune by the late and great Hank Williams.
Sixty years ago the song peaked at #5 on the
Billboard charts. Nobody before nor since had a more piercing
and engaging singing voice than Hank Williams. Bob Dylan,
Elvis Presley and everyone else owe their success to the tall lonesome
drifter from Alabama. He penned some of the greatest songs
ever written. And yeah, Hank smoked cigarettes.
When this song climbed up the charts this was a far different country.
Half the population smoked, and the remainder couldn't care less if
they did or didn't. A 'mind if I smoke?' was typically
greeted with a casual smile. People lived and people died -
same as it ever was. This would be hard to imagine by anyone
born after, let's say 1993 (Clinton's inauguration), as all they know
now is what they've had drilled into their heads by the incessant
Puritan nags who've hijacked American common courtesy and replaced it
with self-centered sniveling. Everything, and we do mean
everything, from cracking the pop-top on a can of soda at high noon on
a sizzling summer day to plugging in the wrong type of lightbulb, is
everybody else's business now.
"Mind Your Own Business" is one of the greatest songs ever
written. The message is loud and clear, like Hank's voice,
and it's simple - you should just worry about your own life and stay
the hell out of mine. I don't really care what you think
about what I do and anyway, don't you have your own life to fret
about? Are you so perfect and trouble free that you've got
the extra time and energy to police my existence? I think not.
Relax, get the corncob out, and stop endlessly studying and counting
everything will ya'?
Go out and get a copy of this song and memorize the words, like
personal freedoms, they're precious. We'll leave you with
just a taste, the final two verses:
If I want to honky tonk around 'til two
or three
Now, brother that's my headache, don't
you worry 'bout me.
Just mind your own business
(Mind your own business)
If you mind your business, then you
won't be mindin' mine.
Mindin' other people's business seems to
be high-toned
I got all that I can do just to mind my
own
Why don't you mind your own business
(Mind your own business)
If you mind your own business, you'll
stay busy all the time
OK, Let's go back to the top of the page now
Happy 4th of July from
smokervoter.com
This is an especially poignant day for most freedom loving
Americans. It is a day we rejoice in our founding fathers wisdom
to devise a system of governance based on individual liberty. The
country we find ourselves in at present is moving away from this
concept at a breakneck pace. The Democrats are back in power and
Al Franken, the nutty comedian-turned-solon from Minnesota, has
just made the Senate virtually filibuster-proof. You can feel the
freedom leaking away and you can see that control-freak look in
the eyes of all of Obama's cabinet members and czars. This was
all avoidable. It is quite likely that smokers voting for
Democrats actually outvoted smokers voting for McCain and the
various Republican statesmen that were offered up in the last
election. This is sad and unbelievable but it is also reversible.
The time has come for a national discussion amongst ourselves, we
the smokervoters of America, concerning this voting practice.
It is never too late to turn things around. It is incumbent
upon we the people, in order to form a better union in the
upcoming 2010 elections, to reverse the damage of the last
election.
Despite an increasingly dangerous
downward economic spiral unfolding, the Democrats chose to remove
33 billion dollars in purchasing power from America's smokers.
The typical reaction to this was - well,
they don't really count as people - they smoke. State legislators
are balancing their budgets on the backs of smokers, the only
constituency they don't fear a backlash from anymore.

It's not just smokers who are on the run, the health cops are
going after any and all activities they deem inappropriate. There
is that word - appropriate - the favorite watchword of the folks
that know what's best for you. We warned you about people who use
that term excessively in a previous harangue on this page - just
scroll down a bit.
So what's next? Will the OCD-laden people who faint at the
very thought of any emission of any sort from any combustible
material next try to ban Fourth of July fireworks exhibitions?
They can be pretty smoky affairs. Don't count it out. Who'd have
ever thought we would be looking at a re-run of Prohibition again
after the abject failure of the last edition? On the positive
side, the fireworks shows can stir up stifled feelings of anger
and resentment at what the whining minority of control-freaks
have done to freedom of choice and personal liberty in this
country. That in turn can translate to a sea change in future
election results. On this glorious day of celebration by what, at
one time, was the most unhindered populace on the planet - it's
important to remember - that a coalition of freedom-loving
non-smokers and a united front of smokervoters can still turn
things around.
Happy 4th People !!!
S-CHIP Surprise
- Bulk Tobacco Increased 2,253%

There is about
a half a pound of
tobacco in a carton of cigarettes.
The new
Democratic controlled congress and executive branch just saw fit
to place the entire revenue burden of children's health care
coverage on the backs of America's smokers. As all of us are
acutely aware of by now, they added around six dollars to a
carton of smokes with this bill. If you still recall basic
elementary algebra, when you increase the price of anything by
six dollars to the half-pound, you've just been asked to pay an
extra twelve dollars per full pound. In a stunning move that
obviously targets the poorest of the poor puffers, the party of
the people increased the tax on roll-your-own tobacco to almost
$25 per pound. That's right folks they doubled the pain on those
least able to pay the tax.
The Democrats
have now officially
come down in favor of regressive taxation - who'd of thunk it? Throughout the last election campaign, the
Democrats
harped on endlessly about Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy. They
assured us all with their rhetoric that things were going to
change and they planned to put the poor and workingman's interest
first and foremost. Then in their first sixty days in power they
voted to tax bulk tobacco, which is more likely to be purchased
by lower income smokers to save some of their meager earnings, by
twice the amount of manufactured cigarettes. The message seems to
be that if you can afford 'tailor mades' we'll go easier on you.
If you earn the minimum wage we've just put the cost of smoking
out of reach for you. A tax increase on the poor is kind of like
a tax cut for the rich in reverse.
The bottom
echelon of smokers must
be feeling somewhat like a dog in obedience training with this turn of events. Obama and company seem
to be
saying to the poor, heel !, now roll over !, and quit your filthy
habit or else ! This is nothing new from the left side of the
political spectrum - they love experimenting with impoverished
people. Brimming with academics armed with lofty degrees in
sociology there's nothing they seem to love more than
manipulating the guinea pigs in their social engineering
laboratories.
If you happen
to smoke and earn
less than $30,000 and traditionally vote the (D) side of the
ballot, you've just been had by your supposed benefactors. Those
towering figures above your cage with the white lab coats have
just rearranged your world for you, for your own good of course.
The
FDA and Tobacco
regulation
THE HALL
MONITOR KING DAVID
KESSLER IS BACK IN THE NEWS
The
donkey party is
back at the helm of state and the smoking headlines just keep
coming at a breakneck pace. This week it's the news of
the FDA (Food and Drug Administration for you non-jargonesqe
followers) bill signed enthusiastically by a president
who is proving to be a proverbial ex-smoking, born-again Nicotine
Nazii par excellence. We had our suspicions about him,
and as we'll see further down the column there's no shortage of
prescience here at smokervoter.com...
Former FDA
commissioner David Kessler made a reappearance on the radar
screen this week, and it is about he that we
shall
conjure up an oldie-but-goodie article we first did on him back
when Clinton was still the president.
David
Kessler is a
poster child for the anal-retentive perfectionism that
prevails through the ranks of the "tobacco control"
establishment. He's a bespectacled, dumpy fellow who always seems
to look as out-of-focus as the world must appear to him when he's
not sporting his trademark coke-bottle lenses. In the new
caddywampus social
pecking order of our times,
where the
Hall Monitor is now the King, the guy is an A-list stud. Hell,
he even won the Public Health Hero award in 2008 for his
tireless work on tobacco regulation. The awarding party's
do-good, nanny packing motto was "Healthier Lives in
a Safer World", oh my god, that says it all.
During a
mainstream media
interview Big Studly Dave droned on in his inimitable way about,
among other things, the importance of not allowing tobacco
companies to produce strawberry flavored cigarettes. We second
that emotion; strawberry cigarettes are just plain awful. Now
go bug off David, you needn't fret about our health anymore, you
are excused from our daily lives. Grrrrrrrr.
FDA
regulation of
tobacco on a 79-17 vote was heralded as a long-delayed victory
for both Kessler and his former boss Bill "Father of Tobacco
Hysteria" Clinton. In fact all of the big-hitters
of the Democrat anti-smoking steamroller had a hand in the
festivities as an addled Teddy Kennedy was cited as one of the
main authors of the legislation. Clinton, Kessler and Kennedy
have all been featured here at smokervoter.com for their ardent
do-gooder activism in the past.
You've got
to go back more than
ten years to refresh your memory of the fine adventures of Willy
and David. Bill Clinton was in the White House hard at work on
his War on Tobacco and David Kessler was his FDA chief. Together
they came up with a harebrained policy scheme to make tobacco a
prescription drug. That's right, you heard that correctly - their
plan was for the errant nicotine addict to pay for a costly visit
to the doctor and walk out with an Rx for cigarettes.
Who says the Democrats aren't chock full of innovative solutions
for a troubled planet. And who says they're at odds with the
nations doctors, as this would have been a literal bonanza for
general practitioners. The plan went down to defeat for lack of
Republican support and a judicial decision.
Once
again a familiar
pattern emerges - punishment from Democrats and relief from
Republicans. It's extremely important for smokers to
note on which side their bread is buttered. They need to cease voting
for Democrats immediately. Furthermore if they can't fathom
out-and-out switching their party allegiance to vote for their
long time Republican benefactors, at the very least they should
consider other alternatives such as Peace and Freedom or the
Greens.
Now
back to that
prescience thing. We here at smokervoter.com highlighted Mr.
Kessler back when this web site had a different name and a
slightly different tack. Back then it was a nascent
GeoCities project page dedicated to the destruction of
do-gooders. The year was 2001, in the wake of the Clinton
administration, when good old mind-your-own-business America was
first showing signs of the wheels coming off. The wheels were set
in motion by George Bush Sr. as anyone with an intact memory bank
will recall. It's very telling to recall that the great Ronald
Reagan was no fan of Bush senior; in fact Bush was thrust upon
him as Veep by the party hacks of the time after he defeated him
in a hard fought primary.
However it
is a given fact that
the horrid Nanny State we're living in now was officially
the baby of the Clintons, specifically Mssrs. Bill and
Hillary.
Paying
for Universal
Health Care
SMOKERS
TO THE REST OF THE NATION: WELCOME TO THE PARTY
Obama
and the Democrats
are throwing out the month of August as the deadline for solving
the gargantuan Universal Health Care problem. The rich don't
possess enough capital amongst themselves to single-handedly fund
the program. The buzz is already out that sin taxes will be
called upon to fill the gap. To this the smokervoters of America
can say "Welcome to the party, pal"
To
those voters who saw
sticking it to smoker's wallets as perfectly
acceptable, based on their sinful
habits, the day of reckoning dawns. You had better be as pure as
you purport to be in reality or you're next. This, of course
means that you had better not eat sugar, drink soda, eat fat,
consume fast food and on and on and on.
This
is a good time to
thank the non-smokers out there who have sided with smokers in
defeating tobacco taxes in the past. You are indeed true patriots
in every sense of the word. Even if your motivation was the
desire to cover your own tail from sliding down the slippery
slope of an eventual sin tax levied upon your favorite vice, your
vote was a sign of superior intelligence. With smokers comprising
somewhere around 20% of the population it is clear that quite a
few non-smokers have joined forces to overpower prior tobacco tax
initiatives. We're just sorry for these fine folks
that the ax will be coming down on them, too.
As
for the rest of you
we can only hope and pray that you turn out to have been closet
sinners. Nothing could be finer than to watch a jerk like Stanton
Glantz going broke paying for his nasty little 10-Cokes-a-day
peccadillo. May the New Segregationists that make up
TobaccoFreeKids and the like all dine out on fast food
voraciously and pay, pay, pay.
Health
care is a big,
big problem and so far copying other nation's health insurance
models note-for-note doesn't appear to solve the issue. Shared
sacrifice must be adopted for any solution to fly. Sin taxes are
not the simple answer they might appear to be at first blush, as
defining just what sin is becomes problematic. Life itself is
sinful - don't forget that fornication can be considered one -
and we're already taxing life to its maximum.
The
mass media and smoker's
issues
SMOKERS BECOME
VISIBLE ONCE AGAIN
AS S-CHIP TAX KICKS IN.
Just over
forty years ago, a
fellow by the name of Marshall McLuhan wrote a famous book on the
power of the media to shape our lives. The book, "The Medium
is the Massage", had a profound effect on American society.
On page 26 he stated "All media work us over
completely. They are so pervasive in their personal, political,
economic, aesthetic, psychological, moral, ethical, and social
consequences that they leave no part of us untouched, unaffected,
unaltered." It's interesting to note that there was no
Internet at the time he wrote the book. The power of the media is
something that smokers need to tap into in order to flex their
currently under-appreciated political muscles. The numbers are
there, of this there can be no doubt. At this writing only the
brute political power is lacking.
If you watched TV or listened to the radio
on
April 1st you couldn't help but notice that, due to the
initiation of the new Federal Tax on tobacco, smokers magically
appeared on the nation's
radar
screens for a fleeting moment. You probably noted the lack of any
mention that a very sizable minority of the population was being
singled out and burdened with a crushing loss of disposable
income and very likely could and would punish its tormentors at
the polls in the next election. Where was the mention of the
consequences to the Democrats and Barak Obama's nascent
presidency that one would expect to hear, given the stupendous
damage meted out to sixty million people? This would be simply
par for the course, given any minority group being likewise
punished politically, were it not for the fact that smoking
appears to be a special third rail issue that the major networks
dare not touch. This is the kind of thing smokers need to focus
on like a laser beam.
The radio waves were crackling with
comment on
the issue. Rush Limbaugh gave an impassioned spiel on the topic,
telling his massive audience that they should seek out smokers
and thank them for the sacrifice of their hard earned dollars
towards providing free health care for the uninsured children of
America. He dutifully noted that this sacrifice is magnified by
the fact that it has a tendency to fall on those with the least
to spare - the working poor. Rush has always had our backs. Like
him or loathe him, he has always been there for us. Adam Carolla
out in Los Angeles, although a non-smoker himself and the father
of very young twins who he naturally would rather not see take up
the habit, is stridently against the nicotine nazis. He fervently
disparages the second-hand smoke liars on a regular basis. He's
sick and tired of the demonization of smokers and he says so -
right out loud and consistently. Adam just started a podcast
radio program, which is getting big numbers on iTunes and he
deserves our support. He's damned funny, too. The drive time DJ's
(John and Ken) on KFI, the 50,000 Watt flame-thrower out of Los
Angeles, are probably the strongest Nanny State Killers you'll
find anywhere on the dial. 'There are others, in fact the
pendulum seems to finally be swinging just a tad in our direction
as it becomes obvious the smokers in this fine country are
getting royally screwed by the system. Americans typically come
down on the side of the underdog.
The television networks coverage of the S-CHIP tax increase on tobacco
products was, at best laughable. They went around interviewing smokers
who all said that they planned to quit smoking - just like that. No
problem - government raises taxes - I quit - what's the problem? In the
fairytale world mass media journalists live in, it is really all cut
and dried and simple. The facts on the ground belie this entirely. ABC
ran a piece on the difficulty of smoking cessation wherein the
interviewee incorrectly stated a 25% rate of success among smokers. In
the real world, where the rubber meets the road, the success rate is
indeed around 15%. Not one media piece brought up the fact that the
Democrats may lose their grip on Congress in 2010 as the remaining 85%
of smokers who, failing to break the habit, turn their anger on the
party that purports to intervene on the side of the working class.
Regressive taxation is not exactly a hallmark of standing up for the
downtrodden and the Dem's have got some major explaining and
backtracking to do with S-CHIP.
Sorely lacking in the media coverage
are any Gallup poll statistics regarding the size of the Democrat's
constituency of smokervoters and just how large a potential hit this
could develop into. Republicans could and should capitalize on this, by
pointing out (R) Bush's veto of S-CHIP. What? - thirteen million
potential switchees aren't worth the trouble? The medium is the
massage.
Lurking beneath the surface, completely unnoticed in popular media
circles, are the myriad internet discussion boards and groups dedicated
to smoker's rights. The commentary on S-CHIP is in full torque mode at
the moment. To be sure, there is internal squabbling amongst the usual
suspects, left and right, but the buzz from Democrat smokervoters
who've been stung with the new taxes is worth noting. There is some
definite anger boiling up here. Do you hear that Obama, Pelosi, Reid
and company? Perhaps you should assign a staffer to monitor these sites
and absorb a little truth in the process. You guys are unquestionably
being connected with the anti-smoking movement now, and that can't be
good news. The medium, in whatever form is takes, is the massage.
As the anti-smoking hate groups ratchet up
the
pressure with their seemingly inexhaustible supply of media
buy-in money, they may be sowing the seeds of their own demise.
Americans aren't stupid, they know a media hate campaign when
they see one. You would have to be awfully naive not to see
through this charade. Our republic wisely guards against the
tyranny of the majority. Sometimes it takes a while to get there,
but we eventually get there. And don't overlook the Forbidden
Fruit Effect either. Tell me not to do something long and hard
enough and, by damn, that's exactly what I want to do - just to
spite you.
The smokervoters of America need to get
themselves a stealth White House reporter. We need to get someone
in the press corps with a press pass and enough juice to get
called on by the President during one of his press conferences.
This reporter needs to get in there and grill this guy on smoking
issues. We say stealth because, although these conferences appear
unstaged, they are well-rehearsed affairs. This reporter would
purport to the White House staff to ask the prez a nice, mushy
softball question and then let loose a real zinger, something
along the lines of "Do you expect your party to suffer
untold damage in the coming elections because of what you've
thrust upon the 25,000,000 smokers with this S-CHIP bill?"
Just ponder that figure in your mind for a moment - 25 million
pissed off voters. All of them totally off the medium's massage
table - for the time being!
Petitions, letters to congressman and
online
discussion groups are all useful to the cause, but media juice is
what counts in this day and age. That and registering to vote and
voting in a bloc (by siphoning off Democrat votes to third-party
candidates) are what is going to get the job done for us. By the
way, Marshall McLuhan passed away in 1980 right at the birth of
the Internet revolution. Smokers might want to go back and
revisit his book in light their current predicament.
THE
DEMOCRAT'S MIDDLE
CLASS TAX CUT GOES UP IN SMOKE FOR 60 MILLION AMERICANS.
The Democrats are back in power and the
great
middle class of America is breathing a gigantic sigh of relief.
President Obama campaigned on a tax cut for 95% of all Americans,
$500 for singles and $1,000 for a family. The Democrats have been
in power for sixty days and tobacco taxes are going up everywhere
at the state level. One of Obama's first bill signings was the
S-CHIP legislation which raised cigarette taxes at the Federal
level. So, if you happen to smoke you can kiss your tax cut
goodbye. Your tax cut has been canceled unceremoniously by the
great Party of the Working People - it's gone - up in smoke as
they say.
This brings us back to the question this
web site
is famous for; why, oh why, does anyone who smokes vote for
Democratic candidates on election day? When will they ever learn,
when will they eeee-ver learn (Peter, Paul & Mary circa
1960). When the political number crunchers dissect the election
results you'll be hard pressed to find any data on how the smoker
voting patterns broke out, so you're stuck with multiplying the
results by roughly 0.20 and then dividing by the presidential
breakout (52.7%-45.9% - Obama/McCain at the final tally) to come
up with a rough estimate. That's a whole lot of smokers who
actually voted to raise their own taxes in an amazing act of mass
self-flagellation. It won't stop there either as the Democrats
are just getting started. If you smoke you'll soon find it harder
to find housing and jobs as the Party that Loves doles out their
curious brand of selective hatred to the working
class
heroes that refuse to kowtow to their demand that they cease
smoking immediately or face the dire consequences.
For the math nuts and
statistically
inclined out there: about 125 million people got out and
voted in 2008. Using a twenty percent multiplier it is safe to
say that at least 25 million smokers showed up to cast
ballots. Obama's share of the vote (52.7%) equates to
exactly 13,226,465 of smokervoters
who actually pulled the lever in favor of the Democrats. The
margin of victory between Obama and McCain amounted to about
8,645,000 votes. For smokers to have reversed the final
results, roughly 65% of those masochistic Democrat smokervoters
would have to have been cajoled into voting for someone else.
It's a steep hill we face to assert our potential power as a
voting force to be reckoned with, that is quite obvious.
The prospect of victory for the Republican
party
wasn't exactly in the cards for the election of 2008 going into
the game. The economy was going into the tank and the war in Iraq
had lost the support of most of the electorate. Voters
conveniently forgot that it was the repeal of the Glass-Steagall
Act by Bush Jr's predecessor that really set the stage for the
banking meltdown. Americans justifiably came to view the war in
Iraq as one big international stakes version of "The Family
Fued" with George Jr. rescuing his daddy's wounded pride by
evening up the score with the evil regime in Baghdad. So, it's
understandable that there were plenty of smokers who just didn't
want to vote Republican in the first place.
Just for the record, on most ballots
across this
vast country there were more than two candidates in the running.
If you happen to smoke and you dislike Republicans there were
many less palatable choices than voting Democratic at your
disposal. Ralph Nader would have been a great choice for the
Progressive-at-heart smokervoter.
Ralph is a Dr. Spock type thinker, logical to the extreme, and
it's likely he would have repudiated tobacco taxes on the grounds
that it is a regressive tax. Cynthia A. McKinney ran for
president for the Green Party. Bob Barr ran for president for the
Libertarian Party. Alan Keyes ran for president for the American
Independent Party.
The point is this folks: If
you enjoy the
subtle pleasure of inhaled tobacco vapors ["Nicotine
triggers the smoker's brain to be more efficient in processing
information. Furthermore, nicotine also reduces anxiety and
induces euphoria. Researches have also shown that nicotine
stimulates alertness and arousal, and sedation and relaxation
based on the dose of nicotine intake"] and
you aren't lucky enough to be one of the fifteen out of one
hundred souls who successfully quit smoking, you should
definitely quit voting for Democrats. The money and freedom saved
will be your own.
LIFE IN
GENERAL IS A RISKY
BUSINESS.
Let's not
rehash the good and bad
angles to smoking for just a minute here folks. OK, you
smoker-haters - you win, you're absolutely correct, we concede
that smoking is not good for you. However, for some reason,
millions of people really enjoy insufflating (look that up in
your Funk & Wagnalls) tobacco regardless of the facts on the
ground. The bottom line is that smoking is a calculated risk that
a bunch of human beings have weighed out and accepted. Driving to
work on the freeway in your car at 70 mph just a hairbreadth away
from another four-wheeled ton of moving steel has its own
inherent risk. So, here we stand. We smoke, we drive to work, we
eventually die - end of discussion. Please. The debate itself is
becoming lethal. Militant anti-smokers really need to move on to
something else.
The whole
debate is beginning to
resemble one of those ongoing household squabbles your kids go
through. Kid A doesn't want Kid B to do something and throws a
temper tantrum. After the tenth intervention to break it up,
you've had it. That's about where we stand today with the whole
'to smoke or not to smoke' argument. We all need a time-out.
In the midst
of the current
economic woes our spinning blue orb finds itself in right now,
capitalism seems to be taking a fitful beating for overdoing the
risk thing. Managing the risks associated with buying a house and
making the monthly mortgage, taxes, insurance, et al gave birth
to the financial derivative instruments that have taken down the
banks. The relatively less risky alternate system of socialism,
in the form of the command economy, is getting a second look by
people in dollar-denominated shell shock. The problem with
command economies is the plan boss, da' plan.
The whole idea
behind a command
economy is for some central planning economic agency, armed with
scads of data, to determine just how many units of this and that
should be produced and consumed by the masses. Supposedly there
will be no supply or demand shocks and life will be hunky dory
for all its happy participants. Were this all legitimate one
might surmise that the Soviet Union would be the world's
superpower and the Ruble its reserve currency.
In a very real
sense this is where
we stand today on the tobacco issue. One camp, armed with scads
of data and a master plan to end tobacco use forever on the
planet, demands that another camp (freedom-loving smokers) not
consume cigarettes anymore. The odds of success for this endeavor
are zilch. The problem is that this is creating a whole lot of
stress, both financially and mentally, on smokers in the process.
It needs to stop and, indeed, it will when smokers come together
and vote in a solid bloc. Take your choice comrade, keep on
smoking and voting for Democrats or bear the consequences. Life
is risky business.
TobaccoFreeCA.com
--- Who are
these guys ???
There are
tons and tons of addicting and toxic things in this world. Food
for starters - we hominids are all food addicts. Food with high
fat content seems to really satisfy the human beast. Smoking
tobacco seems to really satisfy the human beast. Living a modern
lifestyle (as in less than caveman fashion) seems to have
addicted most of the planet, and that's not possible to maintain
without burning toxic fuels in the process. So, because something
is both addictive and toxic is reason enough to start a hate
movement over? Or could it be the hate itself
that groups like TobacooFreeCA.com really
get
off on? Like it or not, some people seem to get addicted to
hating. History is strewn with toxic hate groups like
TobaccoFreeCA.com.
These guys are
the ultimate wet
blanket. They were born to
take the punch
bowl away just as the party is getting good. They've got a lot in
common with the Taliban.
Everybody
must be strict and perfect and dogmatic or
else. You're watching something pleasant on the boobtube, there's
a commercial break, they pop up with one of their dour
commercials, and it's suddenly instant downer time. The wet
blanket guys have done it again. Nobody really cares about their
messages anymore. Smoking hysteria is a dead horse that has
officially been beaten to a pulp already.
Somebody
forgot to inform the
whack jobs at TobaccoFreeCA of all this. Oh well, at least they
think they're saving us all from ourselves with their brand
spanking new message to the people.
Evidently
Prohibition was a
smashing success to these guys and they just can't wait to bring
it back.
Tom
Brokaw/Anderson Cooper
Interviews
PRESIDENT OBAMA
CAUGHT SMOKING WHILE
ROME BURNS.
First he sat down for an interview
with adamant
ex-smoker Tom Brokaw and later with Mr. alternative
journalist Anderson Cooper. With the world's economies literally
collapsing around them outside the studios, what they both wanted
to know was if the President was sneaking smokes at the White
House. Brokaw
saved
THE BIG QUESTION up for the end of
the interview so as
to fully inflate its relative import to the proper perspective.
This reflects the OCD-like obsession the American mass media has
with cigarette smoking nowadays. Tom Brokaw especially has a bone
to pick as a former two-packer himself.
Should the President of the United
States of
America really have to sit there like a juvenile delinquent deer
caught in the highlights and put up with being "caught
smoking" on national television? And aren't there bigger
fish to fry in the first place? For instance, another Great
Depression quite likely to annoy billions of human beings just a
little bit more than a whiff of second hand smoke from one of the
president's Marlboros.
Smokers know smokers, and it was
quite obvious
to the brethren that Mr. Obama indeed still smokes. The stats on
quitting are not good - around 15% succeed at smoking cessation
at best. The mental and physical ordeals of kicking the habit can
be excruciating to say the least. Do we really want the man in
the White House, bearing the enormous task of reigniting the
world economy with carefully crafted Keynesian-style stimulus,
distracted with the agony of jettisoning his beloved Marlboros?
The smokervoter secretly says
"Please
don't quit Mr. President". They know better. They know that
after that pow-wow with Mr. Volker and Mr. Summers and Mr.
Gleithner, the prez can't wait to flick the Bic and relax, really
relax, with a nice cigarette or two. This is something people
from the nouveau-puritan crowd of anti-smokers are incapable of
grasping. Their fanatical focus, as usual, centers on controlling
behavior, which in itself is a nasty habit they've picked up
somewhere along the road of life.
Please, at least until we get the
economy
rolling again, can we back off on the manic fixation with tobacco
that's gripped America ever since Bill Clinton started his big,
bad, War on Tobacco way back in the 90's.
GEE
WHIZ!! THIS WEB SITE
IS SO DIFFERENT FROM ALL OF THE OTHERS OUT THERE - WHAT'S THE
DEAL? - WHERE ARE THE ARTICLE ARCHIVES? --- WHERE ARE THE LINKS?
--- WHERE'S THE COMMENT SECTION? --- THERE'S HARDLY ANYTHING TO
CLICK ON WITH MY BELOVED MOUSE, IT'S DRIVING ME CRAZY !!!
Okay fellow
smokervoters, it's
time we clarified a few things about smokervoter.com's format.
This is not now, nor was it ever conceived to be, a blog. Blah,
blah, blog. You might notice the conspicuous absence of Archives
and maddening Links everywhere on this page. We want you to read
this stuff, not spend your time and your first finger energy
mindlessly clicking
your
mouse over and over and over again. Besides that, once you've
clicked on a link you typically go off on a tangent and it's
goodbye to whatever we were conveying here at smokervoter.
Just because 99.9% of web
sites/blogs/blah,
blah operate with the same HOME ABOUT ARTICLES CONTACT US buttons across the top and quote the same sources ad
nauseum doesn't mean we have to. In fact this site is
designed to be enjoyed while casually puffing on a cigarette or
two while you lightly tap the down arrow on your keyboard with
the first fingertip of your right hand and that's it. User
interface has turned into a game of baby-sitting the Attention
Deficit Disorder sufferers on the internet. It's not unusual for
an article that consists of ten paragraphs to be spread over four
or five web pages - and that is beyond annoying. Click mouse,
wait for idiotic JavaScript/flash ad to reload, click again wait
for idiotic JavaScript/flash ad to reload, click again....not
here at smokervoter.com - that is no way to have fun.
None of this stuff is copied and pasted from elsewhere on the
web. That is so lame and so lazy. You go to the trouble of
creating a web site to contribute your two cents to the world and
you can't bother to think of anything to say? You might consider
printing up some cheap T-Shirts, mark them up 400% and just leave
it at that. Smokervoter is about political power for the millions
of smokers who have been left off of the political radar screens
for too long.
Please just kick back and read every word on this page if
you're so inclined. If you don't have the time right this second
- hit CTRL-D and bookmark us (Add Favorite) for later, we'll
still be here for you. You might also notice an absence of
misspellings and typos on this page. It's absolutely astonishing
that with the advent of automated Spellchecker there are so many
pages out there that are nearly impossible to grasp because of
misspelled words or tortured grammar. We frown on the ubiquitous
overuse of initialisms, abbreviations and acronyms that are as
clear as mud if you happen to be an inside geek, but render a lot
of the web content indecipherable. You will never see lol
here, laughing out loud is soooooo yesterday.
Anyway, it's real simple. Read the first article and scroll
down to the next. They're obviously in a reasonable semblance of
chronological order. They all contain the best we can muster up
here and hopefully they're interesting, entertaining and
informative. As the articles age they actually get better, like a
fine wine. It's a lot of fun to see how well we predicted the
future and how far off we were at times. It's literature and it's
100% free.
Enjoy. Register to vote. Vote.
OBAMA'S
"TWO-FER" AT
THE EXPENSE OF ILLINOIS SMOKERS
WHAT A GUY.
BARACK OBAMA KICKED
IN $275 OF HIS OWN MONEY TO FILL A BUDGET GAP IN ILLINOIS IN
2002.
The year
was 2002 and Barack
Obama was an Illinois State Senator. Illinois had a $500 million
budget gap that needed to be rectified. Obama's solution: tax the
smokers and Save the Children. Back then he admitted to smoking
and in fact did smoke. Assuming that he smoked a pack a day, his
proposal raising the tobacco tax by 75 cents-per-pack would set
him back about $275 that year. What a guy, a politician actually
digging in to his own pocket to help make up a deficit. Of
course, that represented a mere drop in the bucket for a guy who
eventually saved up enough to buy a $1,650,000 dollar house. For
the average working stiff in Illinois, that same $275 represented
maybe a foregone set of tires for his car. Ah, the Democrats -
ever the workingman's friend.
Here is a
direct quote from Mr.
Obama - "A 75-cent-a-pack increase in the state's cigarette
tax would help relieve the state's budget problems and cut down
on the number of Illinoisans who smoke . . . At present, the
cigarette tax is 58 cents a pack. Most brands now cost $3 to $5 a
pack. Imposing the higher tax would mean 'we get a two-fer'
because fewer teens would smoke, and the state would get an extra
$500 million to plug holes in the budget,' said state Sen. Barack
Obama, D-Chicago. 'It's going to be hard for us to find a better
solution than this one,' he said." [SJR, 4/5/02]
Mr. Change
doesn't represent
much change at all to the chastised American smokervoter. It
sounds a lot like the old "Tax the Smoker - Save the
Children" refrain that got started back in 1992 by the woman
he defeated in the primary.
RIDE, RIDE,
RIDE THE WILD SURF
!!!
Watching any movie made between 1955-1985 is a pure joy. There
is an effervescent, ambient happiness running through the
characters and the plots that you won't find today. Just about
everybody smokes and even those who don't manage to suffer the
dreadful pangs of secondhand smoke without dropping dead on the
spot. These cheesy flicks seem a little corny by today's
moribund, uber-serious standards, but they also reflect a time
when America's economic trend was tracking steadily uphill and
Americans didn't have to chose between shoddy products Made in
China and crummy products Made in China. This was the epoch
before the advent of Political Correctness, the Nanny State and
analyzing each and every molecular detail of life to the nth
degree.
Lest we forget, the Genesis or the Big Bang of PC and the
Nanny State took place on January 21, 1993 when Bill and Hillary
Clinton moved into the White House and Hillary put out the
snotty, elitist directive that henceforth there would be no more
smoking at the White House. "The big issue about health is
so paramount to me that I don't think we should permit
smoking." said the new first lady at the time. Permit? Do we
really need or want the first lady's permission visit our
White House? Looking back on it, this was the beginning of the
end of the happy-go-lucky America we once knew.
Mrs. Icy Perfection was followed by the warm and friendly
Laura Bush, who reportedly snuck a few smokes on the White House
grounds, and for eight years the rush toward the ultimate Ban on
Tobacco stalled a bit. Husband George is not the least
politically correct by nature and gets a lot of flack because of
his straight-from-the-shoulder speech pattern. Prepare for an
abrupt left turn in the near future and a return to the
over-analytical days of the Clinton White House. Is there some
kind of etymological relationship between 'anal retentive' and
the word analysis?
If Barack and Michelle Obama become the next occupants, get
ready for a return to Hillaryitis. Barack obviously smoked when
they first met (or still does depending on who you heard it from)
and Michelle may be deeply traumatized from the experience. She
makes a big deal about forcing him to quit smoking in every
interview she gives. They're both academics to the max and will
have a tendency to view life as one big university exam
requiring a correct answer to every question. The politically
correct response to smoking is an all out ban of the product to
those who thoroughly dissect the issue. In the mean time you can
still rent out "Ride, Ride, Ride the Wild Surf", light
up a Winston and reminisce.
IF OBAMA
CHOOSES JOSEPH BIDEN
FOR VP WE'LL HAVE A MAN A HEARTBEAT AWAY FROM THE PRESIDENCY WHO
FAVORS A FEDERAL BAN ON PUBLIC SMOKING
As
mentioned earlier here at
smokervoter.com, during the Democratic debate held at Dartmouth
College, most of the candidates responded affirmatively to the
late Tim Russert's question on a Federal law banning smoking in
public places. Joseph Biden took the lead on this one and
regurgitated a misinformative statement about 400,000 premature
annual deaths. He threw in the word secondhand to make it sound
like almost half a million Americans die from someone else's
smoke and thus it should be enacted as a public health issue.
What a
bigmouth scumbag liar. The thought of him a heartbeat away from
the presidency should send chills down the backs of all
Americans, and especially the millions of patriots that happen to
smoke.
Premature
death and preventable
death are constant themes of the health police. Why don't they
simply fine the survivors of anyone who fails to reach the
average American death age. That should please them. In reality,
the money saved in Social Security payouts by people who check
out early reduces spending in the single largest budget
item of the federal government. Don't sweat the small stuff that
most politicians spend most of their time yammering about, go for
the big picture. Life span longevity in a health police state is
no grand prize anyway.
In what at
first glance would
seem an odd twist, the only two candidates not
favoring
the ban at Dartmouth were Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, who
each cited a preference for regulation at the local level as
being more effective in curtailing public smoking. The more
likely scenario is that these two were the front-runners and had
more sophisticated political advisers. Advisers who know how to
count and could envision 20% of the electorate not voting for
their candidates.
If Joseph
Biden is capable of
such shortsightedness, he certainly shouldn't be our Vice
President. We need rational, deep thinking leaders to solve our
problems.
Barack
Obama's voting record on
smoking issues is not good. He's starting to look like the
proverbial reformed smoker turncoat. We'll be detailing some of
his votes in the near future, stay tuned.
A
SMOKERVOTER SHOUT-OUT TO TWO
OF THE BEST DAMN DJ'S IN AMERICA - JOHN AND KEN
One of the
most popular talk
radio DJ teams in the country, John and Ken,
are
also some of the most energetic Nanny Slayers you're likely to
find out there in the mainstream media world. The same mainstream
media world that relays scary Public Service Announcements about
smoking and just about any other human activity that involves
1/10th of an ounce of risk. The same mainstream media that has
convinced a lot of Americans that 50,000 victims succumb each and
every year to the devastation of second-hand smoke. The same guys
that run ads by TobaccoFreeCA portraying smokers as rats. Yeah,
those guys.
Just last
week John and Ken
were relating a story about Alameda County, in the Bay Area of
California (the literal epicenter of the PC/Anti-Tobacco/Nanny
State), debating whether to pass an ordinance mandating the
correct usage of its recycling containers. Accidentally put glass
in the paper can -- $1,000 fine. In total exasperation one of
them quipped "We're witnessing Rule by OCD now".
Perfect absolutely perfect. If you're a fan of this entertaining
drive time talk show you know this is part and parcel of these
guys schtick. Scratch the surface on the vast majority of the
anti-smoking people and you will find OCD. Obsessive
Compulsive Disorder
- obsessive-compulsive
personality disorder - persons with this disorder are
inflexible to change and bothered by a disrupted routine due to
their obsession for order. Thus, they experience anxiety and have
trouble completing tasks and making decisions. Persons with
obsessive-compulsive personality disorder often become
uncomfortable in situations that are beyond their control and
have difficulty maintaining positive, healthy interpersonal
relationships as a result. Sound like anyone we know, fellow
smokers?
Another phrase they've
coined which sums
up the Nanny State is their description of the people who
populate this movement as "People for a Perfect
World". Again, right on the money boys. Some more
of their jargon; Beard Scratchers, you
know, the
grant-writing college professor who studies every conceivable
human endeavor and finds it inappropriate in one way or another.
The kind of guy who then publishes this worthless study somewhere
(how about The Journal of Riskfree Existence) and the Do-Gooders
and mainstream media latch onto it and it's off to the races.
Some cubicled staffer working for your State Senator picks it up
and the next thing you know - more Nanny State legislation is on
its way.
Ken
mentioned the city council
candidacy of ex-police chief of Los Angeles, Bernard Parks, and
noted that Parks' big issue seems to be smoking. It seems he
wants to deputize on-the-spot any citizen who feels
"threatened by exposure to secondhand smoke" to arrest
said smoker. The people of gang-infested LA will no doubt sleep
easier tonight knowing their cops are protecting them from the
wayward wisps of outdoor cigarette smoke wafting about. Forget
the collateral damage of gang shootouts, Bernard has bigger fish
to fry. Ignore the Pollution Index reading published every day by
the EPA. They don't bother measuring the tobacco content of the
air in LA as it likely wouldn't register on their instruments. If
you live in his district, vote him out.
Anyway,
hats off to John and
Ken. Tune in to them if you can, they're nationally syndicated
and better yet, secretly put them on as a radio preset on your
most paranoid, fidgety acquaintance's car. Preaching to the choir
is one thing, but getting the message across to the skittish deer
of this world is just precious.
FAIT
ACCOMPLI FOR AMERICA'S
SMOKERVOTERS: HILLARY CLINTON WILL NOT BE
OUR
NEXT PRESIDENT.
The
foregone conclusion that
Hillary Clinton would gain the nomination of the Democratic Party
and then go on to defeat the currently out-of-fashion Republican
candidate didn't pan out. The Godmother of the war on smokers
won't be residing in the White House for the next four years. She
won't be reviving her husband Bill's big bad war on Big Tobacco
(read: you, the beleaguered American smoker). The choice has now
been narrowed down to two ex-smokers, John McCain (who quit 30
years ago) and Barack Obama, who just recently quit, no doubt
because of the realization that you simply won't be elected
President if you smoke.
What is now
desperately needed
is some info on where these guys stand on the future of tobacco
taxation and other issues dear to the hearts of those of us who
vote and dare to smoke. McCain's handlers seem to be aware of the
residual hostility the smokervoter rightfully holds toward their
man by having him give throttled down smoker-denunciation
soundbytes.
For
instance, during the vote
on S-CHIP, McCain questioned the logic of taxing smokers to pay
for healthcare insurance, a position that signaled a sea change
from his earlier assertion that sin taxes are always justified.
Maybe, just maybe, one of his handlers has
whispered in
his ear "Hey, smokers constitute 20% of the population and
you've got some fence mending to do, John."
Obama
hasn't had a lot to say
of the issue of smoking. This is something that could be easily
reversed by any reporter who, while adorned in a "I Smoke
and I Vote" tee-shirt, would simply rise and ask the
candidate about his
feelings on
tobacco control legislation. Perhaps the issue of tobacco
legislation isn't on the radar of the press corps as the economy
and Iraq have taken first slotting in the election, but it surely
matters to the one in five American voters who happen to smoke.
With prices at the gas pump and the grocery store taking center
stage, the rest of America is beginning to feel the effects of
price inflation that smokers have been subjected to for the past
few decades.
It is
interesting to watch
these two candidates tripping over each other in order to grab
the Latino vote which amounted to 9% in the last election.
Apparently the broad swath of voters that smoke and have been on
the losing end of the legislative process for the past 20 years,
are invisible to these guys. This should end and end right now.
BIRDS OF A
FEATHER: HITLER, BIN
LADEN AND NOW BILL GATES AND MICHAEL BLOOMBERG.
Yes it's
true, the man at the
helm of the most despised company on earth and New York's
detested Nanny Mayor have joined the club of smoker-haters. But
they're actually late to the party; Hitler and bin Laden were
both way out in front of them on this issue. Bill and Mike have
joined forces on a new initiative aimed at ridding the planet of
demon tobacco.
Gates
should
instead focus his energy on putting out a product that actually
works for a change, and doesn't always involve
"hooking" its clients on ever more expensive products
in order to simply stand still. New York City Nanny Mayor
Michael Bloomberg decided not to shake up the
presidential race with an independent candidacy when someone in
his camp informed him that Nanny State politics are on the outs
with the American public.
An east
coast blogger, Maggie's
Farm, whose wonderful credo contains the following blurb Freedom from nags, cranks, government, do-gooders,
control-freaks and idiots is all that we ask for. recently parodied
Bloomberg's "A
City that really cares" initiative. While it was a
tongue-in-cheek piece it touched on the reality of Bloomberg's
annoying reign. He's gone after smokers, trans-fat, dog owners,
gun owners and everyone else lacking a certificate of perfection
with a passion, and he's pissing people off left and right now.
Go ahead Mike, enter the presidential fray, and find out that you
won't even garner half of Ross Perot's 19% showing in the 1992
election. Gotham is sorry they ever elected you now.
Bloomberg's
name was brought up
and bandied about the other day on the McLaughlin Group
show as a vice presidential candidate for John McCain. Has the
Republican Party lost its mind? John "Mr. Amnesty"
McCain and the Nanny Mayor on the same ticket? Here's the problem
with nanny staters: they actually think the American people are
behind their cause in the name of the twin concerns of safety
and The Children. The hard truth is that one thing you can take
to the bank on about the American psyche is this - Don't
Tread on Me. The folks at Maggie's Farm got it right.
The now
remarketed Mr. Nice
Guy, Bill Gates, has left a legacy to the world of computers that
infuriate their users with his horrible Windows operating system.
Had there been healthy competition, in place of the monopolistic
evolution of software, we would no doubt love our computers a lot
more now. The great philanthropist of soggy Seattle is now going
to bug us about our smoking.
One of his
first save-the-world
plans was to assure that the country of Bangladesh, which suffers
from a harrowing overpopulation problem, cut its infant mortality
rate thus aggravating its future suffering exponentially. This
makes about as much sense as one of his Windows Help files. He
just doesn't get it and never has. He's a weirdo that lives in a
world of computer code and has no notion of reality and common
sense. Now he's going to get involved in your life if you happen
to enjoy Turkish tobacco. Forget it Bill, we're not taking advice
from the guy who gave us Internet Explorer while the utterly
superior Firefox browser is cleaning your clock.
It's funny
how these
megalomaniacs like Hitler, bin Laden, Bill Gates and Mayor Mike
always seem to obsess on smoking. It kind of makes you want to
light one up for the good of humanity.
BETWEEN
BARACK AND A HARD PLACE
THE SMOKERS
OF AMERICA HAVE A
SCORE TO SETTLE WITH JOHN McCAIN, BUT...
In light of
the fact that it
looks like John McCain will be the Republican standard bearer,
the smokervoter is stuck with a perplexing lack of good choices.
It's either McCain or Hillary or Barack Obama and it might just
be, although his party officially hates all smokers, that Obama
is the guy smokers have to go with. He either smokes or has now
quit, but as such he might possess some valuable insight into the
trials and tribulations of the most vilified minority in the
country. On the other hand, he could go the often seen
hypocritical ex-smoker route and lash out at the rest of us. That
is precisely what ex-smoker John McCain did in 1998.
John McCain
really stuck it to
smokers back in 1998 with a proposal to add $18 dollars to a
carton of cigarettes. He adamantly refused to entertain any
criticism of his pathetically flawed predicate that by raising
the price everyone would quit smoking overnight. A smoker himself
for thirty years,
he blamed tobacco
advertising for hooking him in the
first place. Google in "McCain and tobacco tax" and
refresh your memory of what went down when he and Ted Kennedy
were trying to ram this through Congress. Went down is exactly
what happened as it eventually failed, but only by the skin of
it's teeth.
He doesn't
deserve your vote if
you smoke and he's got no amnesty coming from any of us, that is
for sure. But it gets a bit more complicated than that. If a
Democrat is elected President and the donkey party retains
control of the Congress we are in for a world of hurt. We will
undoubtedly be heavily taxed for the Universal Healthcare bill
that will finally come to pass. Democrats have answered
affirmatively to an outright ban on smoking in public during
debate questioning. This is serious business folks. On the other
hand, Republicans have stuck up for smoker's rights over the
years and deserve our credit, in the form of votes, for this
stance. So with this in mind do we hold our collective noses and
vote for John McCain in November?
It's such a
shame that this man
ended up at the top of the heap. The first and second best-world
choices would have been Fred Thompson or Mayor Rudy. Thompson
tenaciously defended a citizen's right to do as he pleases and
Rudy spoke forcefully against the Nanny State during the
campaign. They both lost from late start strategies, but what is
done is done.
So, what
about voting for
Barack Obama? He seems like a guy with a strong moral compass
that would resist his own parties' pressure if he felt they were
wrong. And dead wrong is what, not just Republicans but, even so-called
progressives increasingly view the Democratic party as being on this
issue. Look up articles
on tobacco taxation and follow the reader's comments and you will
see more and more lefties objecting to the regressive taxation
problem with cigarette taxes.
Lost in the
shuffle may be the
fact that the congressional elections are actually more crucial
to smokervoters than who the next President is. Witness how the
current power balance was able to sustain Bush's veto of the
S-CHIP bill. It was razors thin close and even a small shift to
the Democrats would nullify this. Do not let any of your
smokervoter friends sit this election out.
It goes
without saying that
Hillary Clinton and a Democratic controlled House and Senate
would be our (and this countries) worst nightmare. Think back to
the roots of the Nanny State and Political Correctness and you
will find Hillary and Bill Clinton, banning smoking at the White
House and pushing their collective rights and
responsibilities philosophy, as the launching pad. The
arrogant and smug way of framing all issues in the "we know
what's best for you" matrix is a nauseating leftover of
their reign in the White House. Born of their overly educated
academic backgrounds, the Clintons still see themselves saving us
from our deeply flawed selves and that includes smoking. In other
words study the world from the safety of your classroom windows,
crunch the data (no matter how skewed), write a thesis and the
problem is solved.
OREGON REJECTS PROP 50, NANNY
STATE ON THE
ROPES AND FADING FAST
The defeat
of Oregon's Prop 50
by a solid margin says a lot about the basic fairness of the
American people. It says a lot about a lot of things. It shows
that honest hardworking rural people, as has always been the
case, have a lot more couth than many of their 'sophisticated'
but rotten to the core cityslicker counterparts. To be more
precise they're better than six out of ten city dwellers as 60%
of populous Multnomah County voted for Prop 50. This hideous
piece of legislation was slaughtered by rural Oregonians. Rural
folks have never expected a free lunch out of life while some
(emphasis on some) urbanites seem to welcome it. Corruption and
the lack of a moral compass are common in big city politics.
One should
not forget that Rob
Reiner's horrible Prop 10 in California almost lost back in 1998.
It's outcome wasn't known until three days after voting ceased.
It passed by 8/10 of 1
percent. A glance
at the map shows a similar pattern to the Oregon vote. The
population centers at the coast went for it and the vast rural
interior didn't buy it.
The
Governor of Oregon had this
to say. "What happened was, the tobacco industry bought the
election," Ted Kulongoski said in an interview Tuesday night
with The Associated Press. The Democratic governor declared that
"this fight isn't over," and said he and legislative
leaders would be looking at other ways to get more children
covered. This guy should take the Democratic word from his title
as he obviously doesn't trust democracy. The people spoke, the
people voted and he should just shut up and get out of the way.
This guy is moving up toward the top of the Smokervoter Shit
List.
The
Democrats adoption of the
segregate and soak'em platform is really hurting them. People
inherently see the unfairness and it's hard for them to carry on
as the workingman's friend when tobacco taxes harm lower income
workers so heavily. Smoker's didn't pick this fight with the
Democrats; rather Clinton, Reiner, Rangel, Pelosi, Kennedy and
now Kulongoski picked this fight. It is they that will have to
pay by becoming diselected.
This
victory lends credence to
the basic postulate of smokervoter.com that smokers can become a
potent voting
bloc, if they come together. Swinging just one-third of smoking
Democratic voters is the key to victory. Exposing the
anti-tobacco groups as segregationist and prohibitionist in their
nature and actions is paramount. The universal enemy of all
freedom-loving Americans, the Nanny State must ultimately and
totally cease to exist.
America is
too great a country
to sit back and watch personal freedom diluted away by a
relatively small but powerful cadre of health police and
politically correct thought police. You talk to most people and
they're up-to-here with nanny government and PC. A good solid
voting alliance of smokers combined with most rural and some
(apparently about 40%) freedom-gene city voters can and will do
the trick.
In other
news... Rob Reiner
officially endorsed Hillary Clinton for president with a big
fundraiser at his house in the limousine liberal section of Los
Angeles. He raised some really big bucks, sang happy birthday to
her and blah, blah, blah. They truly deserve one another. Talk
about double negatives. Hillary has super high negatives, with
50% of people declaring they would not vote for her under any
circumstances. Rob Reiner is detested in California by all but a
small cluster of ex-hippies and smoker-haters. If you thought
hippies were all about love, think again. Go to one of their
strongholds, like Santa Cruz CA, light one up and just watch the
love flow.
Reiner
actually toyed with the
idea of running for governor of California at one time. This was
ostensibly before his handlers contacted pollsters and found out
that just about everyone hates the Meathead. His days of All
in the Family fame are long gone, he's physically disgusting
to look at, and his stale political ideas are forty years out of
date. His latest income redistribution ballot initiative
completely tanked at the polls. It would have been illustrative
had he run, publicly quantifying the reality of how few people
really want a nanny state. Arnold would have swamped him in one
of the most lopsided defeats in history.
Much like
the peacock fluffs
out its' plumage to appear larger and more threatening than it
actually is, the nanny staters use the mass media to look like
the majority. They're armed with a huge treasure chest of money,
strong-armed from the smokers, and they own the
message. This is the ultimate insult, smokers are forced to
pay for the ads that mock, ostracize and denounce them. The
smoker-haters scream bloody murder that the tobacco companies buy
elections while their own coffers dwarf them in comparison.
Proposition 99 in California generates $350 million dollars a
year from that states smokers alone, most of which is then poured
into anti-smoking media propaganda.
A
VERY FUNNY REPLY TO
AN ARTICLE IN SPRINGFIELD, ILLINOIS
Illinois
recently raised
cigarette taxes by 90 cents/pack to pay for a road building bond
issue among other things. An article about this appeared at
SJ-R.com, better known as the Springfield Journal and
Register, to which many citizens commented on. As usual, a
small hate-filled contingent of Nanny State types applauded the
tax and a much larger (read everyday people) group of smokers and
non-smokers despised it.
Many
smokers said they would go
to Missouri in the future to buy their smokes. About 2/3rds of
the way down the list someone with a very good sense of humor
posted this passage based on the song "Puff the Magic
Dragon":
Puff, the
magic dragon, lived
by the sea. And frolicked in the Prairie State, in the Land of
Fantasy. Little Jackie Paper loved that rascal Puff, as did the
leg-is-la-tors who promoted fancy stuff.* Oh, tax the magic
dragon, cease his mighty roar. The magic tax we need to pass, to
pay for roads and more. But simple math-e-mat-ics, belie the
tales of lore, So Jackie took his magic Puff to a friendly taxing
shore.* Now Puff, the magic dragon, lives by the sea. And frolics
in the border state, that we all call Mis-sour-i. Little Jackie
Paper loves that rascal Puff. As do his friends, who caravan,
because they've had enough!
Absolutely
brilliant whoever
penned this!






STEP BY STEP
INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO
FREELOAD TAX DOLLARS or How to
get someone
else to pay for your free lunch.
STEP 1: CHOOSE YOUR FREEBIE
[ ] Free Cradle to Grave
Healthcare [
] Free college tuition [ ]
Free
Slurpees
STEP 2: CHOOSE YOUR TARGET DEMOGRAPHIC MINORITY
[ ] Blacks - only 13% of the
population [
] Hispanics - not quite as easy at around 18% [
] Teenagers - They're too young to vote
STEP 3: CHOOSE YOUR INCOME SOURCE
[ ] Rap music sales [
]
Tortilla sales [ ] Cellphone usage
STEP 4: JUSTIFICATION
[ ] Harmful to young
impressionable minds [
] Fat content - high diabetes rate [ ]
Distraction from driving and learning
STEP 5: CIRCULATE VOTER PETITIONS - COLLECT
SIGNATURES
STEP 6: DEMONIZE TARGET WITH SCARY PUBLIC
SERVICE
ANNOUNCEMENT TYPE TV ADS
STEP 7: ORDER LUNCH AND SEND THE BILL TO THE
NEXT
TABLE !!!
"don't give
me that do-good
buuuulll...shit"
Pink Floyd
said it a long time
ago in the song Money. For the American Lung
Association,
Citizens for a Smoke Free America and all the rest of the
so-called public health advocate do-good groups, the gig is up.
It's not really the tobacco companies nor the hapless tobacco
plant doing it's thing growing in the sun you hate. It is the peo
ple,
the human beings that smoke cigarettes that you hate. You're not
fooling anyone with half a brain with your do-good bullshit
anymore. You've become organized hate groups now. You are out to
deny jobs, housing, recreation and income to any person who dares
not kowtow to your demand that they cease smoking immediately.
Your obsessive hatred of smoking is turning you into hate-mongers
and bigots, plain and simple. You should seek out psychiatric
help.
In the
meantime you're creating
a lot of enemies with your wrath. Even people that don't smoke
are astounded by your actions to push the envelope of curtailing
personal freedom to its limits. What else can you expect when you
carry on like you've been carrying on for the past twenty years.
Smokers that considered you an annoying nuisance now see you as a
lynch mob out for their blood. Take a gander at the blog that was
created to gather opinions by USA Today on their article
detailing a ban on smoking in apartments and condos by the
Belmont, CA City Council. You were detested by smokers and
non-smokers alike. Believe it or not Americans take their
freedoms damn seriously. You would have more success in China,
Russia or Nazi Germany but not here guys.
The
communist-like Nanny State
that you seek has hit its zenith. You had it your way for quite
some time as you turned up the pressure bit by bit on smokers.
Now people have absolutely had it with you and your tactics and
your hate campaign. The ballot initiatives you use as weapons are
either
winning by slimmer margins or they are failing now. People
started to realize that if it was the smokers losing their rights
today it might be something else tomorrow, like fat for instance.
Sure enough the food police started in and now no one is buying this
public health overkill anymore. Look for mayors and councilman who are
fond of curtailing the citizens precious freedoms to begin losing
their seats.
It's like this:
Citizens
for a Smoke Free
America or Rob
Reiner, people do not like to be told what to do! Nobody likes
piety nor holier-than-thou lecturing. People don't appreciate
anyone who imposes their will on other folks. People don't like
intolerance and hatred in this country and this is what you're
all about. Your Taliban style ain't cutting it here pal. In a
nutshell, don't give me that do good bullshit
anymore.
Give it up, go away, disband, and mind your own business because the tide is turning
and it's doesn't look
favorable for you anymore.
Editors
Note: You
may notice that some of the articles below this point refer to
Hillary Clinton as the probable Democratic presidential nominee.
This is because they were written awhile back. Smokervoter.com
doesn't have an archive section. Archive sections are kind of
dull - who wants yesterdays papers? Besides that it's fun to see
how prescient we were in our prognostications. Go ahead and read
all of them, we promise they're all edifying and informative
snippets of unvarnished truth.
Smokers
should consider
hiring a James Carville or Karl Rove

The two preeminent political mathematicians of our times are
James Carville and Karl Rove. Karl Rove was known as "the
architect" and he indeed engineered two victories for George
Bush Jr. Both were incredibly close squeakers, but a win is a win
nonetheless and to the victor go the spoils. James Carville was
the obnoxious, garrulous and barely discernible character who got
Bill Clinton elected with his famous mantra "It's the
economy, stupid". It was indeed the economy and we got Bill
and Hillary Clinton and their War on Tobacco for eight long
years.
One can only wonder why the beleaguered smokers of America
haven't ponied up some major cash to create a fund for the
employment of a major league political mathematician to defend
their interests. No political demographic segment has taken more
hits in recent history than they have. The only excuse would be
that they're financially tapped out from the taxes they've had to
absorb.
The next best thing to do is to give smokervoter.com
a chance to advance a game plan that is feasible, doable and
realistic, with a good prospect of denying Hillary Clinton the
presidency in 2008. As they say, let's
do the math...
We're
going to throw a lot of numbers at you,
but please bear with us. About 120,000,000 people came out and
voted in the 2004 election. Using rudimentary analysis it is
pretty safe to assume that around 20% of those votes came from
people who smoke. Twenty percent of 120 million comes out to 24
million votes, no small amount indeed. The election turned out to
be a pie sliced right in half, so let's just say that 12 million
smokers voted Republican and 12 million smokers voted Democratic.
We need to focus on those 12 million Democrat voters like
a laser beam. If we
could persuade
just one-third of these people to vote for Ralph Nader, the Green Party or
Peace & Freedom that
would constitute a
4 million person swing vote. Four
million votes would
have been enough to change the outcome of the last two elections. Despite the pre-anointment by media circus
political
pundits of Hillary Clinton in 2008, she has huge negatives and
this election could prove a lot closer than one might suppose.
Of course one can only daydream
of a 100% solid, monolithic
voting bloc of 24 million smoker voters totally calling the shots
in America from now on. Just imagine how the candidates would
change their tune with that many votes at stake. But historical
analysis suggests that is not really feasible. What is feasible
is a one-third shift on the left side of the ledger. That means
that two out of three Democrat smoker voters will still cast
their ballots for Hillary (they are definitely masochists) in the
voting booth.
What can you do to help convince
these critical voters to
change their minds you ask? For one thing, you might have noticed
how smokers tend to bond together nowadays. We're forced to smoke
outside the restaurant or the bar and we start a lot of
conversations as a result. In a friendly and courteous manner,
ask your fellow smoker what party they are affiliated with. If
the answer is Democrat, this is the time to engage in some gentle
persuasion. Let's not be like our enemies in the anti-smoking
klan and be deadly serious or harsh and vitriolic in the
approach. Use humor and warmth and even take no for an answer,
but do plant the seeds of thought, they might
just grow.
Getting a lifelong Democrat to
vote Republican would really be
a hard sell and quite frankly it might not be the right thing to
do anyway. There are lots of good people in this country who
happen to vote Democratic. Union workers and middle class folks
have had good reason not to vote Republican in the past. Asking
your Democrat-voting smoking brethren to vote for Ralph Nader or
for the Green Party or for the Peace & Freedom candidate is
an entirely different proposition. If more people voted with
their real inner conscience, third party candidates would gain
more power and influence and our blessed democracy would improve
drastically.
When you combine the solid
Republican base of smokervoters
with the aforementioned four million swing votes you arrive at a
voting bloc of sixteen million votes. That works out to about 14%
of likely voters, a factor Carville nor Rove would ever dream of
ignoring. These guys are used to trying to attract microscopic
piechart slices of one or two percentage points to their
candidates. Thankfully, because this is America, there also exists a
large contingent of non-smokers with the Freedom Gene who tend to
see through and dislike candidates who spew the
neo-prohibitionist (and segregationist) smoking ban rhetoric.
So far we're talking big picture
presidential politics but
once a trend, the likes of a fourteen percent voting bloc, starts
hitting the radar screens it's a safe bet the congressional and
statehouse contests will follow suit in short order. A great deal
of the damage to smoker's rights and income streams comes in the
form of state ballot initiatives and local ordinances. To
counter these onslaughts only voter turnout and registration
drives will work. Start working on your non-voting smoking
friends to register and get out to vote!
One last thought on hiring a
political math pro. The ideal guy
to hire might just be James Carville, yes, that
James
Carville. He knows Hillary Clinton inside and out and he's
acutely aware of her vulnerabilities. He figured out how to get
her despicable husband elected and he's probably capable of
figuring out how to defeat her. Carville is an enigmatic fellow,
married to a staunch Republican, and one could envision him
reveling in the challenge of greasing the skids of her downfall.
BACK
TO THE TOP AND ALL OF THAT AFOREMENTIONED EXCELLENT CONTENT
Are there no limits to their hate?
The hate group known as TobaccoFreeCA is running an expensive
series of television ads in California in which a smoker is
juxtapositioned in split screen with a rat. If you thought
smokervoter.com was stretching the truth by labeling the
anti-tobacco klans as bona fide hate groups this should leave no
doubt. The Ku Klux Klan in their heyday never bought television
time to spread their hate messages. The Skinheads probably don't
have that kind of money to spend. It's doubtful that the networks
would run ads for either anyway. We want to know who the ad
executive is that pre-screened this abomination and saw nothing
wrong with it.
They couch their ad-hominem attack with some references to Big
Tobacco purposely hooking smokers like lab rats, but it's not a
corporation next to the rat image, it's a flesh and blood fellow
human being smoking a cigarette. This is not an accident, it is
by design. The purpose of this ad is to equate smokers to rats in
peoples minds. This is sick and it is hateful, period.
Did TobaccoFreeCA screen old Joseph Goebbels footage to get in
the mood for this ad? Hitler's Third Reich was also really down
on smoking, so they're in good company with old Joe. If you think
this kind of hate propaganda is justifiable in the name of public
health, you need to check your mental health.
You've got
a dangerous obsession that has overcome you like the mass
hysteria that overcame Germany in the 40's.
They're also running ads which basically call on smokers to be
denied housing. They show cigarette smoke flowing through
baseboards and electrical outlets and they carry on with the
shopworn toxic second hand smoke drivel. Ask any carpenter about
the likelihood of this being possible. It shows the extreme
paranoia that has gotten to these folks. They're coming to take
me away, hah, hah...they can't sleep because there's a smoker
somewhere enjoying a cig...check under the bed, there's a smoker
under every one.
So there you have it folks, smokers are rats and they should
be forced to live in caves and you still think it's a stretch to
call anti-smoking activists well-disguised hate groups?

To come back to this index just click on the
cherries at the end of the article!
SOAK THE
POOR, SAVE THE CHILDREN
Whenever a hot potato issue such as national health care
becomes hopelessly insolvable, due to the various competing
factions such as doctors, lawyers, insurers, and pharmaceutical
companies, politicians throw in the towel and reach for the
expedient solution to everything these days...tax the smokers.
Smokers represent only twenty percent of the constituency at best
and are easily sacrificed. They come "pre-demonized" by
twenty years of social slander by the mainstream media and the
untouchable public health organizations (hate groups) like the
American Lung Association. However a big huge right hook could
come out of nowhere and send the unwary Senator to the canvas for
the ten count. That would be the galvanizing of this twenty
percent of voters into a potent voting bloc. The tendency for
human beings to group together in a common defense posture for
their literal survival portends this eventuality. Payback is a
five letter word that starts with a B.
Once again we're witnessing another example of taxation by
segregation in a new bill introduced by Senator Grassley (R-Iowa)
wherein the twenty percent of voters that happen to smoke are
going to pay for healthcare for the poor children of this
country. This technique was pioneered by Rob Reiner in California
with his $5/carton tax initiative and was quickly latched onto by
Bill and Hillary Clinton, John McCain and Teddy Kennedy and
others. Notice how notorious "friends of the poor" like
Clinton and Kennedy suddenly changed their tune by adopting this
hideous strategy in their campaign to tax smokers for everyone
else's healthcare. It's a well
established fact
that cigarette taxes impact disproportionately on lower income
citizens, but that appears to be okay with the Clintons and
Kennedys. They're quick to point out that once taxes are raised
the poor will be forced to quit smoking or go broke paying for
cigarettes, but we all know how that goes. Case studies indicate
that very few people quit smoking but apparently well educated
people like these folks and their large research staffs missed
this readily available information. This goes to show how these
leaders really view the poor, as a class of citizens that need to
be forced into behavioral adjustment for their own good by
sanctions initiated by the educated and wealthy ruling class.
This same sickening patronizing attitude was used to
"civilize" the Native Americans during early United
States history.
This entire taxation by segregation strategy is inherently
dangerous to our system of government. Tax policy has always been
designed to spread the pain equally throughout the populace in a
nod to basic fairness and improved compliance. Once you start
purposely segmenting the tax burden by demographic slice you've
destroyed this principle. You end up with one grouping of
taxpayers, invariably a minority cluster of the whole, paying for
the pet programs of the rest. The temptation to use this strategy
is rather obvious, the political math is perfect. Candidates
promise government benefits to the majority (the coin of the
realm for politicians) and send the bill to the few who didn't
vote for them for prompt payment. Large gain and very little
pain.
The fact that Senator Grassley comes from the right side of
the aisle is a rather new twist. Before his current disastrous
Immigration Bill Folly (which cost him any chance at the
presidency), John McCain once teamed up with Ted Kennedy during
the Clinton administration to raise Federal cigarette taxes. Only
the valiant efforts of Bob Dole (R-Kansas) killed this
legislation, which would have cost the average smoker a lot of
money. Had the smoking voters managed to vote in sync in the
election of 1996, perhaps as gratitude to Mr. Dole, Clinton would
have been the one term President he so deserved to be.
These are two examples of Republicans resorting to the
demonize, separate and tax stratagem, but overall Republicans
have the better record of the two main parties. The Democrats
have definitely taken the lead in the great war on smokers. If
smokers ever hope to join together to make a difference in the
next election, anomalies like the two noted examples should not
be given too much weight.
You might find the Republicans to be repugnant for their
Chickenhawk contingent with armchair warriors like Rush Limbaugh
and Dick Cheney leading the charge to Baghdad with a Texas Air
National Guard pilot at the controls. One might find themselves
perplexed by the pious preaching of the born again Senator who is
then caught with the prostitute. There are times though when, in
the name of self preservation, you've got to hold your nose and
pull the lever for the lesser of two evils. Given the overall
track record of the last twenty years, it would be a disastrous
mistake in the long run for smokers to vote for a Democrat. The
anti-smoking political lynch mob got their start during the
Clinton White House and pretty much came to an end when Bush took
over the reins, at least at the federal level. This much should
be duly noted. As an alternative the Democrat who smokes and
votes should vote for the Green Party or Peace and Freedom
candidate. You remain true to your conscience, you're not voting
Republican, but you are denying the presidency to Hillary
Clinton. Hillary Clinton will seriously deplete your disposable
income if she's elected, this is for sure.
And so we now add the name Grassley R-Iowa to the SMOKERVOTER
SHIT LIST for defeat in his next election. He will be
joining John McCain R-Ariz and former Republican Michael
Bloomberg, the Nanny Mayor of New York City, on the right side of
the ledger. Orrin Hatch R-Utah earns a place with his appearance
as one of Nancy Pelosi's carnies at the media circus press
conference following Bush's veto of the S-CHIP bill.
SEPARATELY WE ARE DOOMED TO BEING TAXED OUT OF
EXISTENCE
TOGETHER WE WILL DECIDE WHO THE NEXT PRESIDENT, SENATOR,
CONGRESSMAN, GOVERNOR, MAYOR AND COUNCILMAN WILL BE.
REMEMBER HOW CLOSE THE LAST FEW PRESIDENTIAL
ELECTIONS
WERE?
NOW PICTURE TWENTY PERCENT OF THE ELECTORATE VOTING IN UNISON.
PICTURE YOURSELF AS A MEMBER OF SMOKERVOTER.COM, AN UNAPOLOGETIC
AMERICAN SMOKER WITH THE POWER AT YOUR FINGERTIPS TO DECIDE THE
FUTURE OF AMERICA and PUT AN UNCEREMONIOUS END TO THE NANNY STATE
ONCE AND FOR ALL!!!

If you're fed
up with the ever
increasing cost of smoking, head on over to ryomag.com (RYO = Roll Your
Own)
and spend a couple of hours on Dave Brown's magnificent website.
He covers everything you will need to know about rolling your own
tobacco products and saving a ton of dinero in the process. But
there's a whole lot more than that to this page. On top of some
excellent content on Astronomy and RV'ing, there's Dave's
thoughtful and insightful opinions on the anti-tobacco lobbies
and personal freedom. Mr. SCSI (his moniker) employs all the
delicacy of a 28-ounce carpenters framing hammer to drive home
his excellent musings on the neo-Prohibitionists and New
Segregationists intent on turning our beloved country into Moscow
West.
Warning: this
page is huge and
there is so much great content that you might want to get out
your rolling machine, cigarette tubes and tobacco bag and prepare
to roll a pack or two as you peruse the Musings of a Desert Rat
@ ryomag.com...
Here is the
link to Audrey Silks
website. Support her all the way. She's been
fighting for
our rights for a long time now. Her site is officially titled NYC
C.L.A.S.H. which officially stands for Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment. Click
Away---> http://www.nycclash.com
<