A Shot in the Smoke War.

(Quicki blog – early work tomorrow. Not many left.)

There is a man in Aberdeen intent on sueing the Scottish government over the smoking ban. His claim is that it has ruined his life and he wants a million pounds. No he doesn’t, not really. What he wants is what we all want – the right to live life our own way again.

Simon Clark thinks his action is a waste of time and money.

Justice4Smokers disagrees and thinks the case should be fought. As do many of Mr. Clark’s commenters.

Who is right? They both are.

The Scottish Nannying Puritans will laugh off any attempt at redress from the smokers they so delight in tormenting. Pubs closing down? Look again. The SNP are also vehemently anti-alcohol. Pubs closing down is what they want to happen. The destriuction of social life and any form of enjoyment for the little people is a feature of the smoking ban, not a bug. It is exactly what it was intended to achieve.

The MSM will not report the case, unless the Puritans win and then it will be front page news. ‘Smokers slapped down again, ha ha ha’.

It’s rather like Hamas firing rockets into Israel with no real hope of hitting anything important nor indeed of hitting anything at all.

However.

I think Hamas are either incredibly dim or incredibly clever. They must know they cannot win a stand-up fight with Israel. Their random fireworks are no match for Israel’s precision bombings. Either they really believe they can make Israel give up by blowing up sand or they are up to something much more devious.

Hamas are the ones who break the ceasefires but that is not what is widely reported. Israel’s retaliation produces much more newsworthy destruction than the pop-fizz-bang of a rocket landing somewhere in the vicinity of a shed. Hamas know they cannot win this war. They are not trying to win. They are trying to goad Israel into an over-the-top response. Then the rest of the world will turn on Israel and… that’s what is happening.

Hamas are not the good guys. They are letting their own people die to further their ideology. They are deliberately setting up their rocket bases in civilian areas, knowing perfectly well that the Israelis have no choice but to target those areas. Israel are not the good guys either. Hamas put their children in the Israeli sights but it’s the Israeli finger on the trigger.

What else can Israel do? Hamas have them backed into a corner. Stop the rockets by hitting Gaza or let them come, not much of a choice really.

It occurs to me that we are in a similar situation. In the Smoke War we are firing little rockets into the desert. They do little more than irritate Anti-Tobacco but that irritation is growing. Even when the MSM report on the proliferation of shed-pubs in people’s gardens, they neglect to mention the why of it and ignore the ashtrays on the bar. There is no mention in the news of the increasing number of people buying their tobacco abroad or from Man with a Van or growing and curing their own. Those shots landed in the desert. They were noticed, but publically they are brushed aside as irrelevant. Yet it rankles that we can do these things and still get away with it.

More and more people are buying tubing tobacco and making their own. Even at shop prices it’s much cheaper because loose tobacco is less heavily taxed than readymade cigarettes. Once you have the knack of tubing, it’s easy to shred and stuff a bit of leaf. Then it becomes very cheap indeed.

The rise of vaping was a rocket that shook the roof tiles of Tobacco Control. That was a close one. It threatens their masters, the Pharmers, and it warps the tracks of the gravy train. Their response is, frankly, ridiculous but the MSM report it anyway. The MSM report what they are told to report. There is no ‘free press’ and it’s quite likely there never has been. Before the Internet, all we had was the news reports. Were any of them ever really unbiased? Back then, we had no way to check.

The shots we have fired have not cost us money, on the whole. Mostly they have saved us money – in terms of tubing shredded leaf, a lot of money – but should  we balk at the idea of firing a big, expensive one? Will it win the war? The answer is probably ‘no’ but we aren’t really trying to win… because we can’t. We cannot beat an enemy with endless funds provided from taxes and Pharmer profits, when all we have are our scrap-metal fireworks.

We can, however, goad them into greater and greater acts of idiocy and that does work. It is already working. When the Daily Mail puts up another of its ‘smokers are bad, m’kay?’ stories they get more comments starting ‘I’m not a smoker but this is just getting ridiculous…’

We won’t get the MSM to support us against the bigger, stronger enemy but every step that enemy takes towards total lunacy turns more people against them. The drones are at last starting to look at it all and say ‘Huh?’ Keep pushing, keep goading, keep firing rockets into the desert. The antismokers have, unlike Israel, nothing real to use in retaliation. They have no equivalent to a laser-guided missile. They have no proof of their basic claims, their more outlandish ones are the sort of thing they might have come up with on a drunken night out – if they were capable of enjoyment, that is.

They claim the moral high ground but we are not the ones using children as human shields here.

So, should Mr. Auld fire his rocket into the desert and hope to hit something? It’s going to be a very expensive rocket and it will probably not hit anything important. He probably will not win his case.

But if it gets any coverage at all, it will rattle their roof tiles. It could get a few of the compliant smokers thinking ‘Hey, he’s right, you know’ and bring them out of the shadows.

Is it worth it?

Better yet, is there a cheaper way? Do we really need to fire the rocket at all? Could we just pretend we’re going to? It might well have the same effect.

If the MSM got wind of a campaign to raise funds for Mr. Auld, that might be just as effective as the court case itself – and might be even more likely to get into the news.

We don’t have to always tell the truth. The enemy never do.

 

Advertisements

45 thoughts on “A Shot in the Smoke War.

  1. People seem not to know what to think about the Ebola treatment given to recently returned Americans, since the treatment is associated with tobacco…http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/two-americans-who-contracted-ebola-in-africa-received-an-experimental-serum/2014/08/04/dbc44a48-1c07-11e4-ae54-0cfe1f974f8a_story.html There must be some way to hate.

    The drug cocktail the two Americans received, known as ZMapp, was developed by the San Diego company Mapp Biopharmaceutical. It is manufactured in Kentucky using fast-growing tobacco plants, which act as “photocopiers” to produce proteins that are extracted from the plants and processed into the drug, said a spokeswoman for Kentucky BioProcessing, the company that works with Mapp.

    Like

  2. their more outlandish ones are the sort of thing they might have come up with on a drunken night out – if they were capable of enjoyment, that is.

    Yeah, more like sitting around a laminex table, sipping on peppermint tea and eating seaweed crackers.

    Like

    • I expect they’ll be drinking cognac and chomping on £20 cigars and probably snorting some snow too while they demand we all live as directed.

      P.S. Can you really get seaweed crackers? I love fried seaweed and these crackers sound wonderful.

      Like

      • Fried ‘seaweed’ is actually a form of cabbage. Try lava bread from Wales. It’s made from kelp and they eat it in parts of south Wales because there was a time when there was nothing else. It is vile unless fried in bacon fat, then it is possible to keep it down.

        But yes, hypocrisy abounds among the Puritans.They buy all the booze and smokes they want – with the money they take from us.

        Like

  3. I will soon be taking legal action against the NHS. People don’t give me a hope. It’s the principle that counts and it will get media coverage. I’ve had a half page in the local paper already, so this could go national and hopefully convince a few NHS-worshippers that their idol is a fake, just as this Aberdonian will make people think.

    There are people reporting Blair, Cameron and others for their treason. Blair has crime numbers at several police forces. If enough people act, things will get done and the Masonic bonds that hold the political-judicial system together will have to break under the strain.

    Only a very tiny proportion of the population will ever stand up for themselves though and the people who run the system know it.

    Like

    • Go for the ‘protection racket’ angle. We are forced, under threat, to pay for the NHS but not allowed to use it. That is no different to what the Kray twins did.

      The Krays were considered upstanding members of the community at one time, you know. When they fell, they fell all the way.

      The NHS gangsters might want to read up on some history.

      Like

  4. Thank goodness for a brief bit of common sense about Hamas and Israel. Although not at all a popular opinion.
    But just exactly what they expect Israel to do remains a mystery. Hamas want Israel out and gone, preferably dead altogether. But it ain’t going to happen again, as nor should it.
    Has The World forgotten The Six Million? Probably. Shame on them. I haven’t forgotten.

    Like

    • “Has The World forgotten The Six Million? Probably.” Elena, when I first thought of “TobakkoNacht” as a book title, my main concern was that too many people would find the reference offensive or a trivialization. Instead I found that the big problem was that people under 35 or so basically didn’t know anything about Kristallnacht. If you check the reading at http://bit.ly/Preface you’ll see I eventually spent a while reminding people about it.

      Very sad though, the way people DO forget. And today, quite aside from the smoking issue, I also see the same sort of hate being built against the Muslims because of their radicals. Are some of the complaints justified? Yeah, the Hamas firing rockets into Israel and expecting to look innocent when they’re retaliated against is pretty lame. Clitorectomies and forcing women to wear veils etc ain’t exactly in line with hippie freedom ‘n love. But still… some of the invective aimed at them as a group is scary.

      :/
      MJM

      Like

    • When your everywhere at every moment the enemy doesn’t know what hit them!

      One man can make a difference hit em hard and hit em fast!

      Like

      • Harley, your my hero – a shining example.

        In a topsy-turvy way, those with the big guns, Tobacco Control, are ones actually holding the children hostage. I mean they hide behind them all the time.

        Like

        • Until you can use the children yourself and take away that moral tone they keep using…………Always remember the children are the property of the parents not the government. Its just that easy to fight them with. There not out to save the children but to control their every thought and everything they learn and to the point of making them snitches against their parents.

          You must frame the argument against government intrusion even when it comes to children and every horror story that can be dug up like this one:

          Obese kids removed from UK families: 78 Kids Taken From …

          http://www.ecanadanow.com › Curiosity

          Mar 02, 2014 · Obese kids removed from UK families: 78 Kids Taken From Parents For Being Too Fat. Obese kids removed from UK families … Obese children removed …

          Like

          • Victorian authorities remove obese children removed from …

            http://www.news.com.au/national/victorian-authorities-remove-obese...

            Jul 12, 2012 · Obese children are being removed by their parents in Victoria. … At least two children in Victoria have been removed from their parents because of their …
            .

            CPS WORKERS REMOVE OBESE CHILDREN FROM PARENTS’ …

            http://www.orangecountycriminalattorneysblog.com/2011/07/cps-social...

            … I read today about incidences of obese children being removed … We know more and more about obesity as time goes on to know that parents … If CPS social …
            .

            Obese children removed from parents | Boston | Yelp

            http://www.yelp.com/topic/boston-obese-children-removed-from-parents

            Jul 09, 2013 · Obese children removed from parents. … have removed children from their parents’ care and placed them into … fat kids is the same as being a …
            .

            County places obese Cleveland Heights child in foster care …

            blog.cleveland.com/metro/2011/11/obese_cleveland_heights_child.html

            … this is the first time anyone in the county or the state can recall a child being taken from a parent for … with obese children. It removed the boy …
            .

            Obese children and removal from homes – Chicago Tribune

            articles.chicagotribune.com › Pediatrics

            Dec 20, 2011 · Obese children, government … likelihood that the child would receive effective treatment after being removed from his … the parents and the other …
            .

            Should Parents Lose Custody of Obesity Children? – ABC News

            abcnews.go.com/Health/parents-lose-custody-obesity-children/story?…

            Jul 13, 2011 · “When a child is being put in harm’s way, … “If we give government the option of removing obese children from the … Should Parents of Obese Kids Lose …

            Like

            • Only leftwing retards would condone such removals or paid hack advocates to run a comments line like we all know only to well dealing with the bans………

              Like

        • Roobee, I like to emphasize how wrong their use of “The Children” is by always referring to it as their “abuse of our innate love and concern for our children.” It is, indeed, a form of child abuse, since the Antis will also work to instill fears and terrors in innocent children about wisps of smoke they might encounter or about how their parents are going to die. And the abuse is at its lowest and most venal forms when “the charities” roll the sweet little choking kidlings out surrounded by clouds of smoke as a surefire hot button in their fundraising ads. Yes, the ad is SUPPOSEDLY to “help the children” — but the overriding motivation all too often is just to soften up the marks and get their wallets open.

          It *IS* a form of child abuse that should be illegal because it confuses the line between REAL child abuse and things that are not. That sort of confusion eventually degrades the horror of the real thing — since supposedly it’s “not any worse” than a child being near a grandfather puffing on his pipe.

          – MJM

          Like

    • I’d love an inflatable tank. It would have Plastic Man on the phone to the police and when they arrive.. ‘Tank? Are you for real? I think someone is seriously wasting police time here’.

      I don’t agree with using the children as human shields for our side. They’re too short. And full of horrible diseases. And not bulletproof.

      We can use their weapons against them without descending to their revolting levels. They have given us a whole army of gullible drones to play with.

      Play with them.

      Like

  5. I’m not sure where the lefties are coming from on Israel – Gaza thing. What do lefties expect to happen? Hamas fire their rockets at Isreal and Isreal shoots them down or some get through and on occassions hurt or kill someone. So how should Israel respond? Let more missiles through? Don’t fire back? Make sure that the numbers of casualties are the same on both sides?

    Israel can’t ignore it or turn the other cheek. They did in in the 30s and 40s and it didn’t work out well at all for them. So they decide to make a stand and react in a way which will not show weakness whilst also deterring Hamas.

    How would any country do nothing when being provoked in this manner?

    Like

    • Israel are forced to respond but that is what Hamas want. They want to provoke not just a response but an over-the-top response.

      This is what the Tiny Blur was paid to prevent, but he’s busy organising his wife’s birthday…

      Like

  6. Isreal have acted like idiots. All the tech and experience they have and they loose 67 soldiers fighting Hamas on Hamas’ terms. Hamas wanted the carnage and they got it plus 67 more Israeli casualties than their crappy rockets would ever have killed.

    Unfortuanely for Hamas only about a dozen of them are left to enjoy their victory and over the next few weeks that number will reduce.

    Like

    • Incorrect, I’m afraid. Hamas are not a top-down organisation. Kill the current leader and there is a new one tomorrow and none of the rest listen to the new leader any more than they did the old one.

      They are tied by an idea. Formed by oppression. Fighting a battle they cannot win.

      So what do they lose by trying?

      When there is no more left to lose then there is no end until the last one with the idea is eradicated.

      Sounding familiar?

      Like

  7. Tobacco Taxation and Unintended Consequences: U.S. Senate Hearing on Tobacco Taxes Owed, Avoided, and Evaded

    Drenkard Statement to U.S. Senate Finance Committee July 2014

    Hearing on Tobacco: Taxes Owed, Avoided, and Evaded
    Before the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance

    Chairman Wyden, Ranking Member Hatch, and members of the Committee:

    I appreciate the opportunity to submit this statement on tobacco taxes and their impact across the country. In the 77 years since our founding in 1937, the Tax Foundation has monitored tax policy trends at the federal and state levels, and our data and research are heavily relied upon by policymakers, the media, and the general public. Our analysis is guided by the idea that taxes should be as simple, neutral, transparent, and stable as possible, and as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit, nonpartisan organization, we take no position on any pending legislation.

    We hope that the material we provide will be helpful in the Committee’s consideration of the issue.

    Executive Summary
    •Tobacco taxes are the highest they have ever been in the United States. The federal rate currently stands at $1.0066 per pack of cigarettes, and state and local rates add as much as an additional $6.16 per pack (as in Chicago, Illinois). These combined rates are equivalent to a tax in excess of 200 percent in some locales.
    •The high tax burden on tobacco results in de facto prohibition of the products, bringing all the undesirable outcomes associated with alcohol prohibition in the 1920s. In our research we have found evidence of substantial tobacco smuggling from low to high tax jurisdictions, violent crime, theft of tobacco and tobacco tax stamps, corruption of law-enforcement officers, and even funding of terrorist organizations through crime rings.
    •The Mackinac Center for Public Policy estimates that 56.9 percent of the cigarettes consumed in New York State in 2012 were smuggled into the state from other locales. Other states with substantial smuggling problems include Arizona (51.5 percent), New Mexico (48.1 percent), Washington (48.0 percent) and Wisconsin (34.6 percent).
    •In addition to smuggling authentic cigarettes from low to high tax jurisdictions, criminals sometimes skirt the legal market altogether and counterfeit name brand products and state tobacco tax stamps. Cigarette counterfeiting is a highly profitable international business that exposes consumers to products with increased levels of dangerous chemicals like lead and thallium. Other sources report finding insect eggs, dead flies, mold, and human feces in counterfeit cigarettes. One source estimates that the Chinese cigarette counterfeiting business produces 400 billion cigarettes per year.
    •In 1994, federal cigarette excise taxes in Canada were cut from $16 to $11 per carton because cigarette smuggling had grown so pervasive.
    •The steady decline in tobacco consumption since the 1960s makes tobacco tax revenue an unstable revenue source. Administration plans to fund pre-kindergarten education with a federal cigarette tax increase are not sustainable in the long term, because revenues are projected to decline, while costs will grow.

    Tobacco Tax Differentials across States Cause Significant Smuggling

    Public policies often have unintended consequences that outweigh their benefits. One consequence of high state cigarette tax rates has been increased smuggling as criminals procure discounted packs from low-tax states to sell in high-tax states. Growing cigarette tax differentials have made cigarette smuggling both a national problem and a lucrative criminal enterprise. The Virginia Crime Commission found that a well-organized cross-state smuggling operation could bring in $4 million with one shipment.[1]

    Each year, scholars at the Mackinac Center for Public Policy, a Michigan think tank, use a statistical analysis of available data to estimate smuggling rates for each state.[2] Their most recent report uses 2012 data and finds that smuggling rates generally rise in states after they adopt large cigarette tax increases. Figure 1 shows smuggled cigarettes as a percentage of consumption in each of the fifty states.

    New York is the highest net importer of smuggled cigarettes, totaling 56.9 percent of the total cigarette market in the state. New York also has one of the highest state cigarette taxes ($4.35 per pack), not counting the local New York City cigarette tax (an additional $1.50 per pack). Smuggling in New York has risen sharply since 2006 (+59 percent), as has the tax rate (+190 percent).[3]

    Other peer-reviewed studies provide support for these findings of substantial black market activity.[4] Recently, a study in Tobacco Control examined littered packs of cigarettes in five northeast cities, finding that 58.7 percent of packs did not have proper local stamps. The authors estimated 30.5 to 42.1 percent of packs were trafficked.[5]

    Figure 1: Cigarette Smuggling Rates by State (2012)

    http://taxfoundation.org/article/tobacco-taxation-and-unintended-consequences-us-senate-hearing-tobacco-taxes-owed-avoided-and-evaded

    Like

  8. Tobacco Teachings, Up in Smoke?
    .

    August 1, 2014

    Guest Post

    by Lisa Heinzerling, the Justice William J. Brennan, Jr., Professor of Law, Georgetown Law; Co-Faculty Advisor, Georgetown University Law Center ACS Student Chapter

    Imagine a government warning on tobacco products that gave nearly equal prominence to both the pleasures and pains of using tobacco products. The “warning” would tell citizens that whether they should use tobacco products or not was – despite the government’s long practice of recommending against such use – actually a pretty close case. Tobacco use is just so pleasurable, it turns out, that its risks – of bad health, of early death – might be worth it.

    Or imagine a parent saying the same thing to her child: here are the risks of using tobacco products, she’d say, but here on the other side are the wonderful pleasures. You make the call; it’s too close for me to judge.

    Despite its strangeness, this is exactly the kind of statement the White House and the Food and Drug Administration have collaborated in propounding in the context of a proposed rule deeming certain tobacco products subject to FDA regulation under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act. Economists from the FDA and the White House’s Office of Management and Budget published a study purporting to estimate the amount by which the health benefits of tobacco use reduction are offset by a loss of the pleasure of using such products. When the FDA’s proposed rule on tobacco products went to the White House for review, White House economists, rather than placing this study in the dustbin where it belonged, doubled down on its strange analysis. Indeed, they ended up increasing the FDA’s estimate of the extent to which the “lost pleasure” associated with reducing tobacco use offsets the health benefits to be gained.

    The FDA and the White House, in short, apparently believe just what the odd announcement I posited at the outset would suggest: it is a really close case whether reducing tobacco use is a good idea. Never mind that people addicted to tobacco use tobacco mostly to forestall the displeasure of not feeding their addiction. Never mind that most people who become addicted to tobacco start using tobacco products as adolescents, when fine balancing of present pleasures against future risks is elusive. No matter. The FDA and the White House still apparently believe decisions about tobacco use are the product of rational analysis, and that rational analysis just might favor tobacco.

    The fact that the strange FDA/White House analysis is buried deep in regulatory documents that few read, and further hidden in soothingly arcane language like “the welfare gain ratio,” does not make it any more palatable. In fact, the government’s two faces on this topic – loudly recommending against tobacco use while quietly countermanding this message – are troubling in and of themselves, especially in an administration publicly committed to openness and transparency.

    As the comment period on the FDA’s proposed rule on tobacco products draws to a close, the FDA and the White House should drop the bizarre suggestion that the pleasure of continued addiction should be weighed in the same scales – and at close to the same level – as the risks to health and life the addiction poses.

    It is worth remembering that White House review of agencies’ rules, including the FDA’s rule on tobacco products, takes place at the direction of President Obama. Maybe someone should ask him if the FDA/White House analysis of the balance between lost pleasure and lost health and life is sensible. I very much doubt this is how he advises his daughters when it comes to tobacco use: it may be good, it may be bad, it’s a close case, you make the call. If this isn’t what he says in private, perhaps it isn’t what the FDA and OMB should suggest in public.

    Like

    • Shit Harley, in this stupid ‘War on Smokers’ could Obama be the ultimate sleeper agent? Oh, that would be delicious irony … The Righteous bought him for his ‘packaging’, the didn’t see the smoker inside …

      Like

      • Cleggy-boy and the Cameroid were smokers too. Both pretend to be ex-smokers but… you can give up any time you like, but you can never leave.

        Welcome to Smoky-Drinky California….

        Like

  9. So anytime you can support your local BOOTLEGGER know its having an effect to the government and they hate competition………………

    Like

    • Absolutely. Watch out for fake baccy though.

      I have no idea why they bother to fake it. Baccy itself is cheap, it’s the taxes that cost money. Crims can sell the real thing at half current shop price and make massive profits.

      We’re going to see the baccy equivalent of ‘skunk’ in less than a year.

      Like

  10. We won’t get the MSM to support us against the bigger, stronger enemy but every step that enemy takes towards total lunacy turns more people against them.

    Yepper That’s it……………..

    Proposed beach smoking ban laughable, unenforceable and easily avoided: Editorial agenda 2014

    Prepare, relentlessly demonized Oregon smokers, for the practice of your supposedly legal habit to be banned along a vast area raked by wind and dominated by two substances that don’t burn: water and sand. The Oregon Parks and Recreation Commission is accepting comments this month on a proposed rule that would prohibit smoking on state beaches.

    So bad are the arguments for this restriction that we’d be tempted to ask, “Have you people completely lost your minds?” if one of the state’s many commenters, Christoper Clark of Gold Hill, hadn’t beaten us to the punch. Instead, we’ll list some of the ways in which the proposal violates common sense.

    The rule change has its roots in Gov. John Kitzhaber’s 2012 executive order banning smoking on most state agency grounds. The order contains a number of exceptions, including public beaches, but it urges the parks commission to get cracking on a crackdown of its own in order “to address wellness issues and to reduce the risk of forest fires.” The commission obediently restricted smoking in parks in February, and now it’s the beaches’ turn.

    http://www.oregonlive.com/opinion/index.ssf/2014/08/proposed_beach_smoking_ban_lau.html

    Like

    • The one I like to play is the smoking shelter. They must be no more than 50% enclosed.

      Why? Who does that protect?

      Get an antismoker or any government official to answer that question. They will not say the only real answer that is possible.

      Spite.

      Like

  11. What will be banned next in the name of health?

    by Leon Louw, 02 July 2014, 05:14

    IT’S about freedom, stupid! When freedom lovers opposed draconian antismoker laws, they were more concerned about civil liberty than about smokers. Their warnings have been vindicated. Health despots, after having villainised smokers, are on a roll. Buoyed by the lack of consumer resistance, they are extending their war to more things people like, from tobacco, liquor and gambling to sugar, salt and fat.

    The voluminous literature produced to support their war on freedom and satisfaction never mentions freedom or that happiness is healthy. Their vacuous mantra that what they denounce “has no benefits” suggests disregard for or hatred of freedom and happiness. But who are they? The lunatic fringe, puritanical fanatics, fascists, communists … or the World Health Organisation (WHO) with its penumbra of activists?

    At the WHO’s behest, many governments, including ours, embarked on social engineering far beyond the original excuse: protecting “passive” victims of smokers, drinkers and gamblers. Government plans include extending the ban on consumer information regarding tobacco — misleadingly called an advertising ban — to liquor, and making ugly packaging, inaccessible products and tasteless food compulsory. It wants to extend discrimination from people who like tobacco, liquor or gambling to people who like sugar, salt, or pap and boerewors.

    The WHO is contemptuous of concerns about its nonhealth proposals. “Do not allow concerns,” it tells governments, about unemployment, antipoor discrimination, inflation and smuggling.

    http://www.bdlive.co.za/opinion/columnists/2014/07/02/what-will-be-banned-next-in-the-name-of-health

    Like

  12. Democrats Want To Tax The Air That You Breathe, So We Shouldn’t Be Surprised They Want To Tax This

    August 1, 2014 By Jennifer Burke

    In the Left’s quest to control every aspect of your life, and implement behavioral modification measures to ‘encourage’ you to eat, think, drink and overall live in the way they believe is best, Democrat Rep. Rosa DeLauro from Connecticut has proposed a bill that would cause you to face a special tax if you choose to drink a sugary beverage.

    http://www.tpnn.com/2014/08/01/dems-want-to-tax-the-air-that-you-breathe-so-we-shouldnt-be-surprised-they-want-to-tax-this/

    A few of the comments:

    biglipzulu • 4 days ago

    These extremist Dems are the modern age Nazis. There’s almost no difference.

    John

    Another good example that the Democrat party is full of jackass fools!!

    Kimberlie Starnes Koenning • 4 days ago

    I am so sick of these people KNOWING what is best for us ignorant peasants, I have lived 52 yrs and rasied children and bounced grandbabies on my knee I think I can decide when I want to drink a coke
    ………………………

    Don’t ever think we are in this fight alone…………the enemy like hitler created to many fronts to fight on. We have an army and allies that don’t even realize yet their all fighting the same enemy for different reasons yet they are our army!

    Like

    • Neither side is worth siding with.

      Both sides consider themselves God’s chosen people and the rest of us goyim/kuffar. Side with either and we are second class mercenaries, to be disposed of after the war.

      I say, let them fight it out amongst themselves. Both sides despise us. Why support either?

      Like

First comments are moderated to keep the spambots out. Once your first comment is approved, you're in.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s