"It mostly appened long ago, with the abolition of the property requirements and direct elections for the Senate. Most of the measures the founders put in to prevent mob rule are already gone."
Therefore, we conservatives should support further erosions? What exactly is right winged?
"But as it happens, the non-smoking rules I'm aware of were put in by elected officials, and therefore are as republican as you'd like."
Wrong. Most of the non-smoking rules are put into place by unelected "appointed" groups funded by smoking revenue. If you are unable to understand the hypocracy, then you need to do some personal introspection to figure out exactly why you feel you stand on the side of the Republic.
"Not in any state I'm aware of. I was under 21 at the time they were beginning to raise it, state by state; I'm pretty sure it went up immediately, at least in Massachusetts."
They grandfathered it in Michigan. I know that for a fact. Of course, you probably were unaware of any grandfathering due to the fact that you were afraid to go to the bars that allowed smoking.
You should really do some research on your own state before you spew your "facts". A simple google search later and I found that the drinking age was increased from 18 to 20 in 1979 and in 1986 it was increased to 21 with a grandfather clause. Look at page 45:
http://monitoringthefuture.org/pubs/occpapers/occ28.pdf "Yep. It's not social engineering. It's eradication of an evil."
Who gets to decide what is "evil"? Do you also support the back door prohibition of religion? About half the nation has decided that freedom of religion now means freedom from religion. Based on your support of the tyranny of the majority and the fact that someone has deemed religion as "evil", I must assume that you support the effort to eradicate religion from society. You can't use an argument to support what you deem as appropriate and then not use it for something that someone else deems appropriate. If you are really supportive of restricting private property rights based on your convenience then be prepared for the same arguments to be used to demonize something you support.
"Conservatives (right-wingers, if you like) favor all sorts of simiilar measures - laws against prostitution, drugs, sodomy, strip-clubs, even pornography. In the past some of us supported prohibition of alcohol."
I don't know one conservative that supports usurping the constitution and growing government. If you think conservatism is for limitation of personal liberties and the growth of government, then you need to rethink your positions. Any intellectually honest Conservative will tell you they want the government to be smaller and they want individual liberty. In addition, they will tell you they want people to be personally responsible for their decisions resulting from liberty.
In one post you said that prohibition of tobacco was not possible, in the next you say you supported prohibition of alcoho. Glad to see that you supported the growth of government that brought us the Kennedys. Glad to see you support the growth of government to the point of elimination of private property and personal liberty. Not everyone will make a "good" choice, however it is not the government's role to dictate those choices. Keep in mind, the tyrannical government that can tell you a choice is not allowed can also force that choice upon you.
Based on your support of the tyranny of the majority and the fact that someone has deemed religion as "evil", I must assume that you support the effort to eradicate religion from societyThat's an idiotic assumption. Based on CSM's use of it, I deduce he's an idiot.
In one post you said that prohibition of tobacco was not possible, in the next you say you supported prohibition of alcoho
I never posted any support of the prohibition of alcohol. Once again, CSM has resorted to crass falsehood to try to make his case.