Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Obama Creates Thousands of New Jobs
Independent Individualist ^ | 6/15/09 | Reginald Firehammer

Posted on 06/18/2009 7:02:20 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief

The jobs are risky, but very lucrative for those willing to take the risks, and require no previous experience or special training. Almost anyone with a driver's license (or at least the ability to drive) can do this job.

How did Obama do it?

What People
Who Don't Smoke
Look Like
A recent Senate vote brought tobacco under the regulation of the FDA. The effort, spearheaded by Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass., in the Senate and Calif. Democrat Henry Waxman in the House (no doubt because of their medical expertise—Kennedy, for example, is considered the government's chief expert on alcohol consumption).

This is very important legislation. It is obvious that tobacco is something a lot of people want to use (which is what the government is counting on), and will continue to use no matter what regulations are put in place, which the government knows perfectly well, but will now be able to increase taxes on and control the distribution of this almost endless revenue producing product.

And it will create two whole new classes of jobs: 1) the army of regulators that will be needed to control tobacco production, distribution, and sales, and 2) the army of tobacco smugglers that this much more profitable version of tobacco (like alcohol during prohibition) will create. Definitely a win-win proposition for employment.

Almost as Good as Global Warming

For the government, the Smoking lies have been almost as good as the Global Warming lies, just not as big. Of all the so-called science proving all the terrible things smoking does, there is no hard-science at all. It is all exactly the same kind of junk-science (surveys and statistics) used to put over the Global Warming scam.

Almost everyone buys it. It's why fools like American Heart Association CEO Nancy Brown can say things like, "The Senate vote is a significant victory for all Americans as we try to reduce the devastating toll tobacco use has inflicted on our communities." When you are driving around your community, keep a sharp eye out for all those heaps of dead bodies and collapsed buildings tobacco is inflicting on your town.

The truth does not matter to these people, especially if they can use their junk science to keep people terrified — don't smoke or you'll die from cancer or heart disease; don't go out in the sun or you'll get skin cancer and die; don't drive without a seat-belt or you'll have an accident and die. Does no one think that perhaps it is not too good for you to be terrified of every blessed thing that exists?

The Smoking Truth

The primary truth is, it would not matter if smoking a cigarette would kill you without fail before nightfall, it is wrong for any government to prevent the production, sale, and use of anything that all individuals involved freely choose to do. There is ultimately only one reason cigarettes (and most other substances) are regulated at all and that is the belief that some people have a right to force other people to do what they think is best for them; and they cannot bear that some people might actually be enjoying their lives without their interference.

Real Men
Real Women
[Click to see
enlarged.]
The truth is that hard science, that is real science, does not identify a single confirmed health issue with tobacco, but does find huge numbers of medical benefits. You will not find that in any MSM sources, because they have become an arm of government terrorism force.

In fact, however, all the excuses for regulating tobacco are lies. Tobacco is used because people enjoy it. They would not use it if they didn't, and doing something you enjoy is good for you. But there are even greater benefits of smoking—benefits the government and its well-controlled media are intentionally hiding.

Among those benefits are the following:

  1. Improves and prevents Parkinson's disease.
  2. "Reduced MAO B (monoamine oxidase) enzyme (smokers in their 60s have MAO B of nonsmokers in their 20s); also here). Lowering of MAO B is the Holy Grail of life-extension."
  3. "Glutathione (chief antioxidant in human body) and catalase (another key antioxidant which neutralizes alcohol damage, cyanide poisoning, etc.) doubled in smokers." In addition to glutathione, which is the body's master antioxidant and metal detoxifier, many other lesser antioxidants and detoxifiers are similarly strengthened.
  4. "Nicotine suppresses cell death of neurons (it also promotes vascular growth factor, e.g. growth and branching of capillaries)"
  5. Reduces osteo-athritis (up to threefold)
  6. Reduces incidence of colorectal cancer in women
  7. People who smoke fare better than nonsmokers when exposed to occupational hazards
  8. Reduces schizophrenia symptoms
  9. Reduces incidence of Alzheimer's and other degenerative diseases
  10. Smoking is protective against thyroid cancer
  11. Severe gum recession, less of a risk for smokers
  12. Children of smokers have lower odds for suffering from allergic rhino-conjunctivitis, allergic asthma, atopic eczema and food allergy
  13. Nicotine stops the growth of tuberculosis
  14. Smoking prevents a rare skin cancer
  15. Smoking reduces the risk of breast cancer
  16. Nicotine is therpeutic in treatment of ulcerative colitis
Real Men
Real Women
[Click to see
enlarged.]
Documented here:

Smoking is Good for You!

Therapeutic Effects of Smoking and Nicotine

More resources:

Other resources, (Books)

Fundamentals of Statistics

ETS and Second Hand Smoke

OH, and while you enjoy that smoke, be sure to have a nice glass of red wine. "The breadth of [its] benefits is remarkable—cancer prevention, protection of the heart and brain from damage, reducing age-related diseases such as inflammation, reversing diabetes and obesity, and many more."

Smoke, drink, and be merry. You'll be happier and you'll live longer.

—Reginald Firehammer


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: addict; bho44; bigpharma; health; junkscience; oppression; pufflist; smoking; tobacco; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-172 next last
Smoking is good for you, and everyone who believes it isn't believes that for the same reason they believe in global warming--they have swallowed the government lies.

Anti-tobacco is Anti-American!

The leftist nanny-state just cannot bear the fact that some people are actually enjoying their lives doing what they hate.

1 posted on 06/18/2009 7:02:20 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Wow! Put on your flame suit.

Incoming! (getting the popcorn)


2 posted on 06/18/2009 7:06:41 PM PDT by netmilsmom (Psalm 109:8 - Let his days be few; and let another take his office)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

They just like to control people no matter what it is.
Socialism =no freedoms for anyone and eventually, even for the sheeple lefties
but they think it won’t happen to them. LOL

Oh, and how is that “freedom of speech” going for Code Pink in Iran?


3 posted on 06/18/2009 7:09:17 PM PDT by TribalPrincess2U (The plan... 0 in power for life. At least that's what they told him.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
There is ultimately only one reason cigarettes (and most other substances) are regulated at all and that is the belief that some people have a right to force other people to do what they think is best for them; and they cannot bear that some people might actually be enjoying their lives without their interference.

Yes and there are plenty of those people on the FR. Here they come now in all their self-righteous fury.

4 posted on 06/18/2009 7:09:39 PM PDT by Seruzawa (Obamalama lied, the republic died.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
Obama Creates Thousands of New Jobs

At the cost of prosperity and personal freedom.

Personally, I would rather be destitute on my own than to blame it on an incompetent leader.

5 posted on 06/18/2009 7:11:54 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Oh, how I wish you were in my life again, friend.
6 posted on 06/18/2009 7:13:26 PM PDT by struggle ((The struggle continues))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

If lining up at the unemployment line is a job then yes...Obeyme has indeed created “jobs”.


7 posted on 06/18/2009 7:14:51 PM PDT by max americana
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
>" they cannot bear that some people might actually be enjoying their lives without their interference."

Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Tyranny.

Thank You Satan 1:50

8 posted on 06/18/2009 7:15:05 PM PDT by rawcatslyentist (<P>Oh Yeah<P><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ajsov1M4h50"> Thank You Satan 1:50</a>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: netmilsmom
Yeah, it'll be good.

I have a friend who managed his asthma by smoking. Whenever he tried to give it up, his asthma would return and make life miserable for him.
9 posted on 06/18/2009 7:15:24 PM PDT by kenth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: struggle
OR EVEN BETTER...


These two cigarette brands were so good.
10 posted on 06/18/2009 7:16:24 PM PDT by struggle ((The struggle continues))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: rawcatslyentist
Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Tyranny.

Pre-Obama, and as dictated by Constitutional law, it's "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of property Happiness".

11 posted on 06/18/2009 7:19:29 PM PDT by EGPWS (Trust in God, question everyone else)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: EGPWS
Pre-Obama, and as dictated by Constitutional law, it's "Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of property Happiness".

That would be as dictated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

12 posted on 06/18/2009 7:34:25 PM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: kenth

LOL.

I do think we have more obesity now that fewer people smoke.


13 posted on 06/18/2009 7:36:01 PM PDT by keats5 (Not all of us are hypnotized.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
That would be as dictated by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence, not the Constitution.

Other than in the ninth amendment of course.

The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

That would presumably include the right to smoke yourself silly. But not in MY house. Even my father in law and father were not allowed to smoke in my house.

14 posted on 06/18/2009 7:36:55 PM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: All

Well, I know of a way to deal a blow to the Obama administration and help people who want freedom.

We just need a few people to apply and be accepted as smoking “regulatory agents”, and bust certain folk. If you bust illegal aliens who run cigarette black market rings, you can get your quota of nabs while allowing good people who black market cigs off free.

A government is only as good as it’s regulators. And if they allow things...let’s just say it won’t be a party for Obama.


15 posted on 06/18/2009 7:42:08 PM PDT by DJ Republica (Sarah Palin is my commander-in-chief. Obama can go to hell.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Thanks for the post! I was beginning to think I was alone in my defense of my right to make my own choice. You don’t want me to smoke in your house (bar, restaurant), then I won’t. If you don’t want to come to my house (bar, restaurant) because people smoke there, well, don’t. The property owner calls the shots.

Good links. Thanks.


16 posted on 06/18/2009 7:47:13 PM PDT by Bhoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kenth
“I have a friend who managed his asthma by smoking. Whenever he tried to give it up, his asthma would return and make life miserable for him.”

My sister does the same. I don't get it, but it works for her. If she quits for a few days, she goes back to turning blue again like we did when we were kids. She smokes seven or eight a day, and you'd never know she had asthma. What it is, the nicotine?

17 posted on 06/18/2009 7:47:18 PM PDT by Rashputin (blif)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Fzob; P.O.E.; PeterPrinciple; reflecting; DannyTN; FourtySeven; x; dyed_in_the_wool; Zon; ...
PHILOSOPHY PING

(If you want on or off this list please freepmail me.)

If you want to know what the philosophy of this article is, it is the philosophy of individual liberty. Hank

18 posted on 06/18/2009 7:47:53 PM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Thank you for posting this.

You are correct, of course.


19 posted on 06/18/2009 7:48:31 PM PDT by elkfersupper (Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin
I've been ridiculed on this forum for repeating the story of my younger sister, who had her first and only asthma attack in 1957, at the age of 3 months.

Our family physician told my father to blow tobacco smoke in her general direction whenever she appeared to be in distress and whenever it occurred to him.

It worked. She is now 52 years old, never had another asthma attack and doesn't smoke.

20 posted on 06/18/2009 7:53:14 PM PDT by elkfersupper (Member of the Original Defiant Class)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

It’s amazing how much our freedoms have been controlled. This is my body, I can do whatever I want with it! I’m not going to have some liberal nanny telling me what I can and can’t do. Soon they’ll be restricting other foods and water and only the Lord can save us then.


21 posted on 06/18/2009 8:00:31 PM PDT by OBONGO_HUSSEIN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

I don’t smoke. Many smokers are just rude. They want to smoke in your home, car and in your face. Some of course are not like that. When I retire and life is short, I may take it up but not until then. I tell my children. Don’t smoke. Don’t drink and drive. Wear your seatbelt (they saved my life). But when you are old what do you have to fear? Skydive. Parasail. Smoke. Do all the things a youngster should not do because they have their life ahead of them and do not imperil that needlessly.


22 posted on 06/18/2009 8:03:16 PM PDT by BipolarBob (It takes a Kenyan village to raise a US president.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Freedom, prosperity, and a good smoke. Even after eight years I'm still in Flavor Country. It's the insufferable puritanism that's gaining ground now that pisses me off. It's always been here, but lately anything that gives a little enjoyment is something to be ashamed of. Not a good attitude to impose on a country as large and productive as the United States.

23 posted on 06/18/2009 8:17:53 PM PDT by Seven plus One
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Oh the hilarity.

Another Moron Ping.


24 posted on 06/18/2009 8:19:25 PM PDT by cranked
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
I recently ordered my fist electronic cigarette. You get the smoke (actually vapor), with nicotine and flavoring. The nicotine in the juice that is vaporized can be ordered in various concentrations from high (36 mg) to zero and there are many flavors available with more being introduced all the time. Since there is no combustion, there are no tars or carcinogens being ingested. I am sure the government will try to regulate e-cigs soon so get them while you can.
25 posted on 06/18/2009 9:14:53 PM PDT by One_American
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Smoking is good for you.
The world is flat also.


26 posted on 06/18/2009 9:45:28 PM PDT by paul51 (11 September 2001 - Never forget)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
Not to change the subject, but I just realized that Henry Waxman is as tall as Edward Kennedy is wide.

The Whale and the Shrimp, running every aspect of your life for your own good.

Let me know when the Useful Idiots among us finally wake up.

27 posted on 06/18/2009 10:02:18 PM PDT by Kickass Conservative (One Man's Messiah is another Man's Fuhrer...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seven plus One

And the tombstone reads:

1990 Quit Smoking

1995 Quit drinking

2000 Quit eating red meat

2005 Died anyway


28 posted on 06/18/2009 10:32:19 PM PDT by Stormdog (A rifle transforms one from subject to Citizen)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Little League Baseball has taken one hell of a hit. (no I never did smoke). (LF outfielder who could reach that 200ft fence). The lefties without discipline can kiss my ass. They have ruined the way that sports were funded and how Dad kicks your ass if you smoke a cigarette. Idiots


29 posted on 06/18/2009 10:45:58 PM PDT by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Stormdog
And the tombstone reads:

1990 Quit Smoking

1995 Quit drinking

2000 Quit eating red meat

2005 Died anyway

2009 Reincarnated as a fly, only to be killed by Obama the president.

30 posted on 06/18/2009 11:04:33 PM PDT by eyedigress
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: cranked
Oh the hilarity. Another Moron Ping.

The information & links posted at the top (with numerous scientific references provided at the sites linked) are result of several debates I initiated in medical & nootropic (smart drugs) forums over the last couple years. Dozens of knowledgeable, bright researchers and graduate students in medical & biochemical fields, including doctors and researchers specializing in health effects of tobacco smoke, attacked my statement "Smoking is good for you" with everything they knew. Months long debates unfolded, arguments were offered, papers were brought up and discussed in depth. Amusingly, the strongest scientific experiments they brought up, appearing to show direct harm from tobacco smoke, turned out upon more careful reading (beyond the antismoking spin in the abstract & introductions) to demonstrate exactly the opposite -- the smoking animals live longer (~20%), while remaining sharper and thinner (by ~15%) into the old age, than non-smoking animals (another one here or here or here or here).

By the time those debates wound down, not only could none of these bright, knowledgeable folks produce a single scientific result demonstrating that tobacco smoke causes any harm at all to the health of smokers (let alone of non-smokers), but they could not name a single other substance, natural or synthetic, with as potent and as numerous therapeutic, protective and life-extending benefits as tobacco smoke. Nothing comes even close to this ancient biochemical miracle.

Ironically, some health conscious readers of those threads, who were strongly against smoking initially, started smoking after following up and checking the scientific references (or another here). Others, such as one smart woman mathematician, started their own sites on the theme "Smoking is good for you" (others here and here) and one moderator, who was ridiculing the idea initially, came back few weeks after the debate in his forum ended, acknowledging that he went out checked the references provided, then checked many of his own, and was left 'scratching his head'.

You can check one of the earlier such debates in a nootropic forum (part of imminst.org), later one here, or in another nootropic/health forum, or one in Dr Siegel's blog (medical doctor, university professor at BU & leading tobacco control expert; another one here)

In brief, all hard science of tobacco smoke (animal experiments, lab research at biochemical level, randomized human trials) supports position 'smoking is good for you', while the antismoking "science" (which was initiated by Nazis in 1930s), after nearly eight decades of intense research and vast resources spent, could not move beyond statistical correlations on non-randomized samples (self-selected subjects, not unlike web polls) i.e. they keep pointing out to this day that such and such diseases are more common among smokers. Duh. Namely, that kind of correlations on non-randomized samples, no matter how strong, are equally consistent with harmful or therapeutic/protective role of tobacco smoke. You need hard science to untangle the causal web behind such correlations. For example (more examples here), people who use respirators have shorter life expectancy than those who never used respirators, while former users of respirators fall in between (the same kind of associations hold for use of tobacco). Does that imply that respirators shorten lifespan?

Antismoking is enormously profitable scam masquerading as science (i.e. a typical junk science), largely produced and paid for by pharmaceutical industry. In return for its investments in battling this ancient medicinal plant (few billions every year for antismoking junk science, for creating and financing "grass roots" antismoking & diseases front groups, in bribes to politicians and "health" bureaucrats, buying antismoking laws and regulations,...), the big pharma profits not only from selling nicotine replacements and other smoking cessations products (which make them 5-7 billions annually), but vastly more from tens of millions in additional cases of Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, asthma, allergies, schizophrenia, depression, anxiety, ADHD, autoimmune diseases, obesity, diabetes,... all requiring years or decades of expensive drugs, and all largely result of frightening public away from this ancient medicinal miracle that has no equal, tobacco smoke (e.g. see some of the enumerated therapeutic benefits acknowledged by none other than pharma sponsored antismoking researchers here).

31 posted on 06/18/2009 11:35:44 PM PDT by nightlight7
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: paul51

“Smoking is good for you.
The world is flat also.”

Believe in global warming too, don’t you? It’s “proven” by the very same science as proves tobacco harmful.

Hank


32 posted on 06/19/2009 5:19:57 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Rashputin
She smokes seven or eight a day, and you'd never know she had asthma. What it is, the nicotine?

One way to find out is with the new Liberty sticks, nicotine in a vapor, many use then to try and quit smoking.
33 posted on 06/19/2009 5:29:05 AM PDT by boxerblues
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

I hope this is sarcasm.

My mother had part of a lung removed because lung cancer; my father is on oxygen for the rest of his for emphyzema.
Smoking is pernicious.


34 posted on 06/19/2009 5:52:20 AM PDT by Little Ray (Do we have a Plan B?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Seven plus One
It's the insufferable puritanism that's gaining ground now that pisses me off.

Hey, there's no need to give the Puritans as a whole the bum rap:

The Social History of Smoking

G. L. Apperson

[...}"It is somewhat singular that the Puritans, who denounced most amusements and pleasures, and who frowned upon most of the occupations or diversions that make for gaiety and the enjoyment of life, did not, as Puritans, denounce the use of tobacco. One or two of their writers abused it roundly; but these were not representative of Puritan feeling on the subject. The explanation doubtless is that the practice of smoking was so very general and so much a matter of course among men of all ranks and of all opinions, that the mouths of Puritans were closed, so to speak, by their own pipes. A precisian, however, could take his tobacco with a difference. The seventeenth-century diarist, Abraham de la Pryme, says that he had heard of a Presbyterian minister who was so precise that "he would not as much as take a pipe of tobacco before that he had first sayed grace over it." George Wither, one of the most noteworthy of the poets who took the side of the Parliament, was confined in Newgate after the Restoration, and found comfort in his pipe.

Some of the Puritan colonists in America took a strong line on the subject. Under the famous "Blue Laws" of 1650 it was ordered by the General Court of Connecticut that no one under twenty-one was to smoke—"nor any other that hath not already accustomed himself to the use thereof." And no smoker could enjoy his pipe unless he obtained a doctor's certificate that tobacco would be "usefull for him, and allso that he hath received a lycense from the Courte for the same." But the unhappy smoker having passed the doctor and obtained his licence was still harassed by restrictions, for it was ordered that no man within the colony, after the publication of the order, should take any tobacco publicly "in the streett, highwayes, or any barn-yardes, or uppon training dayes, in any open places, under the penalty of six-pence for each offence against this order." The ingenuities of petty tyranny are ineffable. It is said that these "Blue Laws" are not authentic; but if they are not literally true, they are certainly well invented, for most of them can be paralleled and illustrated by laws and regulations of undoubted authenticity. Mrs. Alice Morse Earle, in her interesting book, abounding in curious information, on "The Sabbath in Puritan New England," says that the use of tobacco "was absolutely forbidden under any circumstances on the Sabbath within two miles of the meeting-house, which (since at that date all the houses were clustered round the church-green) was equivalent to not smoking it at all on the Lord's Day, if the law were obeyed. But wicked backsliders existed, poor slaves of habit, who were in Duxbury fixed 10s. for each offence, and in Portsmouth, not only were fined, but to their shame be it told, set as jail-birds in the Portsmouth cage. In Sandwich and in Boston the fine for 'drinking tobacco in the meeting-house' was 5s. for each drink, which I take to mean chewing tobacco rather than smoking it; many men were fined for thus drinking, and solacing the weary hours, though doubtless they were as sly and kept themselves as unobserved as possible. Four Yarmouth men—old sea-dogs, perhaps, who loved their pipe—were in 1687 fined 4s. each for smoking tobacco around the end of the meeting-house. Silly, ostrich-brained Yarmouth men! to fancy to escape detection by hiding around the corner of the church; and to think that the tithing-man had no nose when he was so Argus-eyed."

On weekdays many New England Puritans probably smoked as their friends in old England did. A contemporary painting of a group of Puritan divines over the mantelpiece of Parson Lowell, of Newbury, shows them well provided with punch-bowl and drinking-cups, tobacco and pipes. One parson, the Rev. Mr. Bradstreet, of the First Church of Charlestown, was very unconventional in his attire. He seldom wore a coat, "but generally appeared in a plaid gown, and was always seen with a pipe in his mouth." John Eliot, the noble preacher and missionary to the Indians, warmly denounced both the wearing of wigs and the smoking of tobacco. But his denunciations were ineffectual in both matters—heads continued to be adorned with curls of foreign growth, and pipe-smoke continued to ascend. " [...]

Cordially,

35 posted on 06/19/2009 6:21:19 AM PDT by Diamond
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Diamond

They were smugglers as well.


36 posted on 06/19/2009 6:24:01 AM PDT by 1010RD (First Do No Harm)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: struggle

37 posted on 06/19/2009 6:29:43 AM PDT by wolf24 ("Another speech....another problem solved. Who ever knew it could be so easy?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: nightlight7

Thank you so much for you post, and all the links.

Hank


38 posted on 06/19/2009 6:32:00 AM PDT by Hank Kerchief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: 1010RD

mark


39 posted on 06/19/2009 6:35:29 AM PDT by Former Proud Canadian (How do I change my screen name now that we have the most conservative government in the world?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

government controlled ciggs- dictate that ciggs must contain less and less nocotine- causing smokers to be forced into buying more ciggs to meet their nic requirements = more tax money for hte government- dictate the length ciggs can be- again, forcing smokers to have to buy more ciggs to meet their nic requirements = more tax money for government,

Sounds like a mob sydicate takeover of a product they KNOW they can manipulate to force people into buying more than they currently do. What next? Coffee? Caffeine? Chocolate?


40 posted on 06/19/2009 8:27:51 AM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nightlight7

what about hte resports of increased risk of lung cancer, emphasema, copd, tumors etc? I’m a smoker, and certainly not agaisnt msoking, but isn’t htere pretty hard evidence showing the icnreased risks for breathign diseases such as mentioend above?


41 posted on 06/19/2009 8:37:26 AM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CottShop
I read through the articles and if they are legit then I'd have to say that those not predisposed to cancer may benefit from smoking, so a very small percentage.
42 posted on 06/19/2009 9:06:39 AM PDT by Teflonic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Teflonic

Well that may be true- but I think those predisposed to cancer might infact be a large percentage of smokers (myself included most likely- not that I’m goign to give it up- but oh well) Not sure what hte ratio of presdisposed to non predisposed is, but many peopel do die each year to cancers that may not have arisen as early in life had they not smoked it would seem- but hten again- who knows- perhaps other environmental issues were at play causing hte cancer- but smokers lungs are quite gooped up with tar and gunk, and that can;’t be good? As well, there is reported incidence of lung tissue damage due to the hot vapours from smoking over time? All I know is that I do enjoy smoking for htem ost part cept for hte breathign problems (it doesn’t help my asthma- makes it more difficult to breath for me)

I think probably it does help a significant number of people, but I do htink it is infaxct dangerous for those predisposed to cancer or lung problems and high risk folks like myself who have asthma (it might help some forms of asthma, but perhaps not all forms?)

I know smoking causing typing mistakes :)


43 posted on 06/19/2009 9:53:24 AM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: One_American
I recently ordered my fist electronic cigarette.

Me, too. Four days now without smoking a cigarette. Sorry, I meant, "analog." LOL.

44 posted on 06/19/2009 10:09:53 AM PDT by kevao
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief
...don't smoke or you'll die from cancer or heart disease; don't go out in the sun or you'll get skin cancer and die; don't drive without a seat-belt or you'll have an accident and die. Does no one think that perhaps it is not too good for you to be terrified of every blessed thing that exists?

LOLOL! It is so true that "The leftist nanny-state just cannot bear the fact that some people are actually enjoying their lives doing what they hate." At the very least, folks who do the things the nanny-staters hate will be made to pay.... Dontcha know the "experts" know better than we do what is "good for us," and will work tirelessly to try to save us from ourselves? Whether we want them to or not?

I just wish these ninnies would get a life.... And stop living vicariously through mine.

To me, there is something morbid about an excessive preoccupation with health. Plus something's got to kill you. You might as well enjoy your life as you see fit while you have it. Plus people who do so tend not to be the ones who nitpick and meddle in the lives of others.

Very interesting essay/post, Hank! Thank you so much for putting it up.

45 posted on 06/19/2009 10:27:40 AM PDT by betty boop (Tyranny is always whimsical. — Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kevao

Interesting


46 posted on 06/19/2009 10:30:10 AM PDT by Old Professer (The critic writes with rapier pen, dips it twice, then writes again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: betty boop

[[To me, there is something morbid about an excessive preoccupation with health.]]

We need a government ‘health Czar’ to tax people who over-worry about being healthy because htese people are giving themselves health problems thatr affect ME financially! They cause our insurance rates to rise! Let’s go after these inconciderate dolts!


47 posted on 06/19/2009 11:00:41 AM PDT by CottShop (Scientific belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: cranked

Oh the hilarity.

Another Moron Ping.

24 posted on Thursday, June 18, 2009 10:19:25 PM by cranked


Cranked seems to be the street lingo of someone high on methamphetamine. And you’re knocking cigarettes? Curious...


48 posted on 06/19/2009 11:14:39 AM PDT by listenhillary (90% of our problems could be resolved with a government 10% of the size it is now.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Hank Kerchief

Under normal circumstances the natural human reaction is to avoid smoke. We naturally know that sucking fumes from burning material is bad for our lungs. Everyone who has even tried smoking knows how they had to fight down the coughing reflex to start their habit. The nasty stuff found in smokers’ lungs and reduced breathing capacity is pretty straightforward evidence that cigarettes are doing bad things.

What most smokers fail to realize is how filthy and awful they smell to non-smokers. Much of my family smokes and I after I visit them I have to hold my nose on the way to the washing machine and everything my mother sends us has to be washed multiple times to get the smell out. Every surface in a smoker’s home and car is coated in brown gunk and feels grimy- even in fastidiously ‘clean’ smokers’ homes. I grew up in that stuff, when I’m in it it seems normal, but get a little distance and it is disgusting.

This crud justifying smoking is about the equivalent to pot heads and heroine justifying their own habits. Nicotine junkies are no different that any other addict is their desperate need to justify themselves and drag others down with them.

I don’t agree with attempts to bad cigarettes or even tax the heck out of them, but let not kid ourselves that the habit is any healthier than any other addiction. I don’t want to pay your medical bills either.


49 posted on 06/19/2009 11:23:55 AM PDT by Flying Circus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CottShop; Alamo-Girl; Hank Kerchief
We need a government ‘health Czar’ to tax people who over-worry about being healthy because htese people are giving themselves health problems thatr affect ME financially! They cause our insurance rates to rise! Let’s go after these inconciderate dolts!

LOLOL!!!!!!! Yes: Their (i.e., smokers) bad behavior hurts me, me, me: It's always about MEEEEEE....

That's why we have to "socialize all risk," dotcha know!!! In short, the nanny-staters are not the least bit worried about what smokers are supposedly doing to themselves; what they really want is to show that what smokers do as individuals causes the whole society to suffer in some way. On that pretext, one can justify the penalization of any behavior one happens to personally dislike, and regulate just about everything under the Sun....

It's the rare person who sees what a "shell game" this is, and what it aims at: the complete devaluation and erosion of individual Liberty on the pretext of some fictitious "General Will."

Evidently dear CottShop, you are one of those rare persons. And I'm with you.

50 posted on 06/19/2009 11:28:20 AM PDT by betty boop (Tyranny is always whimsical. — Mark Steyn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-172 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson