Recent comments

  • Reply to: Lessons in Legislative Manipulation From the Tobacco Industry   14 years 10 months ago
    The "Senator Norton" whose name appears on the bill was most likely Tom Norton, who was in the Colorado senate at the time. The error has been corrected. Anne Landman
  • Reply to: How the Gun Lobby Beat Activists to the Draw   14 years 10 months ago

    this is totally sick!!! this lady is awesome!!! i totally support the NRA and am completely against these damn bogus gun control laws. maybe if kids were taught about guns then they wouldn't be so dangerous. gun safety could easily be integrated into a drug and alcohol prevention program in schools. If the public was more informed and educated about proper gun handling and overall safety then these deaths and injury could be minimized significantly. in short EDUCATE THE PUBLIC!!! this will be a large part of a solution, not this insane banning of all guns everywhere.

  • Reply to: "Golden Throne" Award Presented to Scott Talbott of the Financial Services Roundtable   14 years 10 months ago
    Hi, lets keep linking up the growing protest and awareness movement against banks such as Chase Bank. Oh, wait, I can't leave links because the will be considered spam. So much for growing a movement.
  • Reply to: Ian Plimer's Mining Connections   14 years 10 months ago
    You would do better to attempt to disprove what he has to say on the subject instead of presenting an ad hominen argument.
  • Reply to: Lessons in Legislative Manipulation From the Tobacco Industry   14 years 10 months ago
    You write that in 1995, Philip Morris disguised "smokers' rights" legislation as property rights legislation, as though there weren't a property rights issue when it came to smoking in bars and restaurants. I don't care what the tobacco companies had in mind (we all know how unprincipled corporations are), but it's absolutely an abuse of government power to ban smoking in bars and restaurants without a compelling reason, in this case a health reason, since no other reason will do. And certainly not a citizens' poll, since we're talking about private property here into which the public is not dragged kicking and screaming. So the rationale for bar and restaurant bans has always been health of staff (and not patrons); otherwise, the state has no business in this instance in telling a bar or restaurant owner -- who after all is in the hospitality business -- how to run things. So just to make you think, here's Dr. Elizabeth Whelan, anti-smoking crusader, world-class epidemiologist (Harvard/Yale), and president of the American Council on Science and Health, speaking for herself and her Council of 380 scientists at the time the New York City ban went into effect: "There is simply no convincing evidence linking secondhand smoke to lung cancer and heart disease." "There is no evidence that any New Yorker -- patron or employee -- has even died as a result of exposure to smoke in a bar or restaurant." And, "The link between secondhand smoke and premature death is a real stretch." Obviously, if Dr. Whelan and her Council of 380 scientists are right (and I believe they are), then bans in bars and restaurants are a clear abuse of government power. And I'll confine myself to that and not go into the devastation that bans have caused in many instances (check out Ireland, for example, where hundreds of pubs have closed due to the ban, with thousands thrown out of work). No squeeky-clean tobacco companies, but our legislators seem scarcely any better. .

Pages