Interesting scenario.
I've been a lobbyist for nearly 20 years, both paid and unpaid, and saw a couple of interesting exchanges.
But I can tell you for fact that some of the nastiest exchanges I saw between legislators and lobbyists on the issue of smoking generally came from the anti-smoking crowd. I was working on an amendment with some bar owners about the smoking ban in Delaware and went to speak with a Senator with some of them. At first he was interested in hearing our concerns and willing to consider our amendment, and we set a meeting for the next day. Later that same day I happened to overhear one of the anti-smoker lobbyists inform this senator that if he supported our amendment, th Senator would be out of his seat next election.
The next day, at the allotted time we went to meet with the Senator and before anyone said 2 words, he said I don't have time for you and smokers have no rights.
Yes, I was told by a State Senator smokers had no rights, even though he knew this was about the rights of the bar owners, not the smokers.
So while you may not like the manner in which some smokers posting anonymously on an internet forum express themselves.....please note that in real life.......your side is far from the virtuous protectors of public health they claim to be.
and BTW - the lobbyist that threatened the Senator's re-election........being paid by the Lung Association. I was just helping out some friends that owned bars, on my own time and my own dime.
It always helps big time to have someone with experience in here. People such as Polybius come off as someone who works in one of those Institutes. Like he knows exactly what he is talking about, and the rest in here might take him at his word.
But you just laid it out front, Gabz. The truth! Thank you!