[Gabz]

Who are you going to believe, Rush or vigilante anti-smokers who created the bogus studies that second hand smoke causes cancer (and other horrendous diseases)?

To be honest, neither. I don't need Rush to tell me what I already know from looking at the books of places before and after bans.

And I've read the same studies the antis have created their bogus headlines from. I've done everything I possibly can to explain that the headlines the MSM spew out have nothing to do with the reality, but those who choose to be believers will not listen to reason.

The selectiveness of some regarding the MSM is truly amazing. I've seen so many on threads about smoking bans claiming SHS is a killer, that I have also seen on threads trasing the MSM for their biased and bogus reporting.

I find it very typical - government intervention/control is just fine with them, as long as it suits their purpose. But they are the first to scream when it is their ox being gored.

I can not and will not take that position.

[TOUGH STOUGH]

I meant the question in the proverbial sense, Gabz.

Since smokers make up a portion of the patrons at restaurants and perhaps an even larger percentage of the patrons at bars, it only makes sense that smoking bans will cause a drop in business. And the percentage of non-smoking patrons gained by the smoking ban I would think would be almost negligible because very few people totally avoided restaurants because of smokers.

Facts and statisitcs seem to bear this out.

And what better proof is there than the ACTUAL books of these establishments, as you suggest, LOL!