Freaking Liberal Bloomin'idiot
Posted on 08/14/2002 2:17:58 PM PDT by sheltonmac
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has a problem. As if securing his city against maniacal terrorists weren't enough, Rudy Giuliani's successor must now face one of the most deadly, terrifying, loathsome creatures in the world today—the American smoker.
If successful, Bloomberg's blitzkrieg against the perilous puffing of tobacco products will result in transforming virtually every public indoor facility into a smoke-free zone. This means that smoke from cigarettes, pipes, and cigars will no longer be a hindrance to the enjoyment of New York City's otherwise fresh and fragrant air.
Bloomberg is happy to be part of what he hopes will become a nation-wide trend. "I am proud that New York City will be a national leader in tackling the most pressing public health issue facing all Americans today: the devastating consequences of smoking." How admirable. Perhaps we should put this man in charge of ridding the world of the threat of terrorism.
The mayor continued, "No one should have to breathe poison to hold a job or frequent an indoor public space." Okay, Mr. Mayor, then no one should have to listen to the inane rants of power-hungry politicians like you. One good turn deserves another.
Now that the anti-smoking bug has wormed its way into the Big Apple, it seems the mayor and the city council will be going after smokers with the same conviction one would expect them to pursue suspected terrorists. In their minds, someone sitting at a bar, munching on a Macanudo, is no better that Osama bin Laden himself. By lighting up in public, that person is slowly but deliberately killing innocent bystanders who naively wandered into a smoke-filled bar under the assumption that they could enjoy their virgin daiquiris without any fear of contracting lung cancer by the time the waitress brought their plate of chicken fingers.
To make the case against these tobacco terrorists, Bloomberg and his willing accomplices started pulling statistics out of thin air. "Working one eight-hour shift in a smoky bar exposes one to the same amount of carcinogens as smoking half a pack of cigarettes a day," the mayor said.
City Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden had his two cents to add: "Second-hand smoke causes more cancer deaths than asbestos, benzene, arsenic, pesticides, hazardous wastes sites, industrial chemicals, contaminated sludge, and consumer products combined. Second-hand smoke kills approximately 1,000 New York City residents every year. That is why we must act now."
More likely than not, New York will act. If anything, it must protect the children. The city has already seen the launch of "Butt Out Brooklyn," a campaign to keep that borough's teens off cigarettes. New York Lt. Governor Mary Donohue praised the program, saying, "New York has an aggressive and comprehensive anti-smoking campaign with a special emphasis to combat smoking among youth. We also encourage collaboration on a local level and are pleased to partner with Brooklyn on this important initiative that affects the health and welfare of all New Yorkers. The anti-smoking campaign sends a clear message that smoking is deadly." I always thought that the warning labels on packages of cigarettes sent a clear enough message, but I could have been wrong.
Strangely absent from any debate over the ill effects of tobacco are the statistics showing the thousands of teenage deaths related to smoking. Where are they? If smoking is so dangerous, shouldn't we be seeing reports of sixteen-year-olds coughing up blood and keeling over in gym class?
Reality always has a way of raining on the pity parades of pompous politicians. For example, the number of smoking-related deaths put out by the Centers for Disease Control (about 400,000 each year) is not an actual count of people who have died. It is merely a number conjured up by a computer model programmed with the preconceived notion that smoking will inevitably generate a hefty body count. What the anti-tobacco activists don't tell you is that according to the CDC's own model, those 400,000 "victims" lived an average of 71.9 years, with 70,000 of them dying "prematurely" at ages over 85.
That politicians bent on social engineering have a tendency to ignore facts comes as no surprise. New York Governor George Pataki used the same approach when he signed last year's law banning the use of handheld cell phones in automobiles. A study conducted by the University of North Carolina Highway Safety Research Center had shown that while distracted drivers posed a safety risk, cell phone use ranked very low among the contributing factors (about 1.5 percent) in highway accidents.
Now that cell phone users are out of the way, smokers are next, and New Yorkers should be concerned. If smoking is banned as a public health hazard, the crusade against street vendor hot dogs can't be far behind. Social fascists like the mayor and the New York City Council will see to that.
So, enjoy sinking your teeth into those juicy, tasty, fatty hot dogs while you can. Just don't let Mayor Bloomberg catch you trying to smoke one.
There is absolutely no science to back this up. Mere made-up hyperbole.
Freaking Liberal Bloomin'idiot
:)
City health Commissioner Freiden better go back to school for some basic math, just like all the other anti-smoker Nazis.
The original number of annual SHS deaths (which don't exist) was 3,000 nationwide, that number has grown incrementaly over the past few years to something like 53,000.
I would love to know how Frieden (Friedbrain?) comes up with this number.
But what really gets my goat - no one will call him on it and it will just be accepted as gospel truth by the sheeple.
Believe me, I know - I've been accused of it many times.
City Health Commissioner Thomas Frieden had his two cents to add: "Second-hand smoke causes more cancer deaths than asbestos, benzene, arsenic, pesticides, hazardous wastes sites, industrial chemicals, contaminated sludge, and consumer products combined. Second-hand smoke kills approximately 1,000 New York City residents every year. That is why we must act now."
Remember when New Yorkers were thought of as tough and pretty sophisticated, even by people who didn't care much for them?
They voted for Hillary, Bloomberg - they're in the grip of a mass psychosis.
Well...no, can't say I do. I'm from South Carolina and we've always regarded New Yorkers as mouthy, amoral dimwits who seem to think crooked politicians hung the moon. ;-)
True...............but as recent years have demonstrated all too clearly, since when does total, complete, utter bulls**t being shovelled in the guise of "fact" really matter, let alone cause outrage among the electorate?
I'd like to see him ban alcohol.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.