HEY SMOKERS - notice the guy takes a dig at pro-lifers as well.
Also - people were talking about second hand smoke long before Hillary showed up.
And for those that doubt the harmful effects of cigs, will you at least admit that it is not good for the skin - and makes the teeth look pretty unattractive?
To me it is just another disgusting vice. You can pay 8 bucks a pack and do it if you want - just don't expose me to it. Does anyone not think that airplanes are far better places because they don't allow smoking on them anymore? And as a former firefighter, I can say that I worked on several jobs - both fatal and nonfatal, where cigarettes were the cause.
The facts be damned. The crusade will go on.
To: Bill
Date: Several Year Ago
RE: Big Tobacco
Bill, this is much better than Whitewater and property flipping or cattle futures. Pretty simple, we make what I call "Big Tobacco" out to be evil. Just make up all sorts of stuff bad about them. It will be a piece of cake.
I have several of the Dem. state attorney general's in on this one. They will get together and sue the tobacco companies. He he. Form a whole new little gov't gang.
But, and this is killer, they will hire out the litigation to our various trial lawyer buddies. Who will take a chunk of the money and send it back to us in soft money donations and to various NGO's who will make donations to us. And to something else I have in mind. It's called Hilpac. More on that later.
This is such a cool way to take money out of the %#&&@%&# saps pockets.
Hillary
PS - I'm thinking about running for senate.
When I see this kind of crap I wonder where the funding came from (research ain't cheap). The second hand smoke argument got the file thirteen a long time ago in a Federal court. The few, and biased (un-peer reviewed, undocumented, and weakly..poorly done) studies were thrown out of the court into the trash can that they so richly deserved. They have been PROVEN to be lies, unsubstantiated glods of written words and useless statistics. Yet the socialist/elistists that don't like people doing a freedom thing, blasts it across the airways and the print media like it's the truth from heaven, and they use these disproven, charlantanic studies to bolster thier claims. Amazing, simply amazing!
When people start disbelieving the logical science that will save them and believe the charlatans that would enslave them, what can the scientist do. I'll fight the charlatans, I guess, I've got no choice, I've done it all my life.
I agree--not that it will make the slightest bit of difference. I quit paying attention to "scientific studies" years ago when it became obvious that they were mostly engineered to permit a predetermined conclusion. In fact, I have very little use for groups like the CDC, the Red Cross, the AMA, and the American Heart Association. Even things like advanced life support protocols are routinely changed every 2 years, most likely on the basis of which drug companies provide the best payoffs or phoney studies.
The only real factor that is likely to help in taking off the oppressive tax is the realization that the economy is unlikely to really recover as long as governments are siphoning off the "discretionary" spending power of 20% of the population. Many of those who thought they were being so clever by shoving the tax bill off onto smokers will find themselves out of a job. Kind of neat how they'll reap what the sow :)
Smoking Bans are not about your Health ... they are about Controlling your Life in yet another way.
Furthrmore they want to increase the tax $3.00 a pack.(have to help the deficit you know), with the logic of the libs, we stop kids from smoking, we raise the taxes per pack so that we can put that money in the general fund then we can have more programs, gee, wonder what would happen if the cigarettes sales took a downward trend, wonder what they would tax next?, don't say booze they decided against that.
Hormesis as a Biological Hypothesis:A low dose of something (best documented for radiation), that is harmful at high doses, can be beneficial.