Liberals Get Smoking Mad
by Tim SlaglePursuit of Happiness is my favorite unalienable right, and a cornerstone of American exceptionalism. No other Nation on earth has happiness written into its founding documents, so people from all over the world flood our borders trying to crash the party. But it seems that the agents of “Change” have stumbled onto a solution: by making America just as bleak and dismal as the rest of the world, they can make everyone stay home. Even the Department of Transportation is on the job.
My friend Louis took up electronic smoking about three years ago; partly because he was trying to quit, and partly because he was tired of going out into the cold Minneapolis winter, to huddle outside the restaurant with the other smokers after dinner.
It seemed like a perfect solution. electronic cigarettes offer the enjoyment of a smoke, without any of the nuisance. You don’t have to light one; it’s just a metal tube that releases a warm nicotine mist. There is even a little red light on the end, that glows when you draw in, so it looks like a cigarette.
It’s completely odorless and smokeless, and doesn’t have the carbon monoxide or tars that cause most of the health problems associated with cigarettes and second hand smoke. So there is no real reason for anybody to complain about electronic smoking.
I thought I might get one myself, because I enjoy the occasional cigar with a cocktail, and it would make a great drinking companion –especially on airplanes. I imagined myself flying across the country with a cigarette and Martini in classic Mad Men fashion. I started flying in an era when you could still book a seat in the smoking section; riding in a comforting veil of nicotine, as you contemplated all the things that could go wrong on a flight.
But Louis told me not to bother. I’m flying to Minneapolis to work at his club this week (Acme Comedy Company, Tuesday & Wednesday September 20 & 21) and he sent me this release. Apparently a lot of people have taken up electronic smoking to while away the hours; and the Department of Transportation aren’t happy.
The only proven health issue with electronic smoke is the possibility of stroke, as anti-smokers burst into red-faced rage at the sight of people enjoying themselves in public. It reveals something I’ve always suspected about the anti-smoking crowd: they are more concerned with people having fun, than they are about health
Making people put out an electronic cigarettes is the same kind of logic that has forced motion pictures to put smoking warnings at the front of their films. Apparently we’ve gotten so overprotective in society, that just the image of someone smoking is cautioned for its negative health consequences.
The DOT knows how ridiculous this sounds. They try to make a case for the ban by stressing that nobody yet knows the health consequences of electronic smoke. It’s not enough to protect us from real proven dangers; they need to protect us from the imagined ones as well. Heck by the same logic I don’t yet know the health consequences of the cell phone at the restaurant table next to me (and cell phones have been linked to cancer). Certainly I have the right to enjoy a meal without exposing myself to Second-Hand Cell.
I understand why people don’t want to sit in a smoky airplane for five hours. I also understand why people would want to spend those five hours smoking. (And I guarantee if I were on a plane that was going down, I’d be pestering my crash mates for a smoke.) But I can’t understand how anyone could be opposed to such a harmless activity, as electronic smoking.
At the very least, let’s segregate the electronic smokers. Put them in the back of the plane, so the anti-happiness passengers will have to severely crane their necks to be outraged. As long as we’re not endangering anyone, it is our unalienable right.
But to the Left, pursuit of happiness is no longer a right. They view it, like they view the Second Amendment: just an antiquated concept written by rich white men, into a flexible document, almost like a hundred years ago.
Email this to a friend | Print |
Share on Facebook
| Tweet this
| 
Follow Us on Twitter
Subscribe via RSS
Got a Tip?
88 Comments
depends- does it smell to the person sitting in the next seat? if it's completely odorless to those around you, then i have no problem with it. otherwise, it's one more intrusive annoyance- regardless of any actual health concerns- i can do without.
not long after airlines banned smoking, i found myself on a long flight with a chatty young woman who was a smoker. a friend had told her she should smoke a cigarette about half way down, put it out, then just puff on the butt thru the flight. oh, boy! just like sitting next to a dirty ashtray for 4 hrs. i wished she could have just lit the g-damn thing…..
The smell test should also apply to the toilet water some people wear.
one my biggest fears.
Time to do the American thing and vote with our feet; not that they will take us long distances very quickly, but they will take us to private planes hired out by potential chartering clubs….We just have to put our thinking caps on and invent a work-around.
I was in a restaurant recently where someone's perfume was so strong that I couldn't taste my food.
How is it harmlful to others? Is it more harmful than excessive perfume, body odor, or flatulation?
Sounds like the author is right…. can't have fun. That or it just p*sses off the nanny-state folks because someone discovered a way around the smoke issues.
Agreed, especially with the cheap crap they have that leaves that oily taste on your tongue, nasty…
If we don't do something soon, it will be too late to reverse that which has been done in the "Name" of freedom. That's the gubmint's freedom to strip us of our freedoms.
Tim, that is one seriously convoluted path of logic. Or illogic. Congressboy John Conyers obtains happiness while viewing pornography on airplanes. Because printed pornography is not malodorous, and it makes him happy, surely it must be Ok. Imagine if he also masurbated to that pornography? "Stewardess? Could you bring me a blanket, a box of kleenex and a martini, please?"
Thank God the use of cell phones is not permitted on aircraft, that would be the absolute final straw. I hope that you can refrain from your electronic cigarettes until such opportunity presents for you to enjoy that martini and maybe even have phone sex a'la Weiner. Who knows, you might even be able to use your cellphone for some congressional style porn!
I can see the restaurant of the future, pre-screened for perfume, patted down for tobacco and if you are caught with flattulence, an appropriate fine based on the magnitude of offenses. You know what jerks!, if you are offended by a little cigarette smoke or perfume, stay home where you belong and make it the way you want it. Bunch of hyper sensitive nanny state offspring.
Here's the work around, Rebas…we start shunning these fusspot liberals who get their jollies by harassing their fellow citizens. We give them a dose of what they've subjected US to for the last 25 years. Let THEM find a "work around"!
These progressive types seem to revel in their ignorance. Probably because in their world all is as it should be.
I think they may have reached the end of their run, 100 years is long enough.
My Nestmate and I switched to electronic cigs and we stayed on them for about a year, then fell back on regular cigs during a stressful time in a family crisis…..
We're looking to get back on them with the hopes to fade off smoking completely. From our own experience, these do seem to be a better alternative. There is no second hand negatives that anyone can claim. It's vapor. But that won't let the non-smokers relax their inhibitions to demand others live a like life as they do…..
Government intrusion in peoples personal lives knows no bounds…..and the weak and pious with nothing better to do, jump on the bandwagon simply because they've nothing better to do except throw rocks from their own glass houses…….
I don't intrude on anyone else's business…..so stay out of mine, thank you very much….
I'm getting monumentally sick of people who don't even know me sticking their nose into my business and interjecting their annoying selves into my life.
We are losing our liberties to junk-science, the second-hand smoke studies were pure fraud.
Using a cellphone on a plane is dangerous, because the signal interferes with navigation electronics. Masturbation in public is illegal.
Electronic Cigarettes are neither dangerous nor illegal.
It is the 1960's lefties projecting their anger on the rest of us over their own childhood. They found no real happiness so they spend their time lording over the rest of us for the sake of our "Health". No salt, no fried food, no alcohol, no drugs (in public any way) They are all hypocrites of course. They do in secret what they tell us we should not do. Thats the nature of projection.
America has always been filled with people like us who see these Victorian nannies for who they are.
These are the same ones who gave us prohibition and created the Mob by unintended consequence.
Here's a hint: They don't set off the restroom smoke detectors, cuz' it's water vapor, not smoke.
The funny thing there are a lot of lefties who like to smoke. And how can they be against cigarettes when so many many them are pro pot? Smoke is smoke. It's like in NY when they elected Bloomberg and he banned smoking nearly everywhere and jacked the cigarette taxes. The NewYorker's just find ways around it. These leftwing crazy bans and taxes on thing like smoking are just plain stupid. They don't work and NEVER will. eg Prohibition.
Liberals are all about forcing people to do things. I think there is a word for that. umm oh yeah, Fascism
It was never about my health or your health………
IT'S ABOUT CONTROL.
"YOU will DO AS you ARE TOLD. PERIOD. WE know what is BEST for YOU. YOU are to DUMB to KNOW anything." – the DEmocRAT Party.
I'm a non-smoker but I have no problem with electronic cigarettes. There's no smoke to bother me and the guy who needs a nicotine fix on a long fight is covered. I'd even been thinking about getting my dad–who is a smoker–a set but Mom told me not to since Dad probably wouldn't take it well.
Mmm…flatulation. Whenever there is a meeting about banning electronic smokers, lets all eat beans and broccoli and any other high fiber food, then go to the meeting, block the doors and let the methane fly.
We could even have a contest (for awhile) for smelliest, loudest, the one that most sounds like the flatuator sharted and any others that may come to mind.
"It was never about my health or your health……… IT'S ABOUT CONTROL. " Yes ed357, thats all it is. I firmly believe that the junk science today is government funded to promote any kind of bull$hit that they want; strictly for political expedience and donations to their money coffers.
" Do as I say and not as I do" speaketh O-turd as he lights a joint and smokes another cigarette.
You must remember, we are too stupid to make our own decisions and must have them made for us before hand. I hate this crap, damnit if I want to drive my motorcycle 150 MPH, smoke, or drink excessivly let me. It is my life not anyone elses to screw up. I have no children, I am married but have a Military pension, IRA's, and 401K to give her if I do die, now leave me to my vices.
Reba, I think the work-around in this case… and others I can think of… is to just ignore the law, en masse. Just completely ignore it. We need to stop being sheep in some cases, and engage in non-violent civil disobedience. And this is one of those cases.
@ MRM… Do you also suggest regulating people's body odor? Maybe put in some regulations for people to brush their teeth or have a minimum dental hygeine requirement? What about smelly food people bring on planes (or into buildings)? Some of that food makes me feel sick…
Should you be in charge of telling everyone else how to live?
Mr, X, "Mind if I smoke?"
Mr. Y, "Mind if I fart?"
LOL… I remember that from a cartoon somewhere.
I agree! Like having an open container in a car… As long as the driver doesn't drink, why can't I drink in the back seat!?!?!
NO! Rights do not "depend".
The decision to have smoking on an airplane must belong to the owner of the airplane. It is a private property thing. Maybe you have heard of it.
clarification… because the signal potentially interferes with navigation electronics
I'm an ex-smoker, and everyone knows we can be the worst people to deal with when it comes to others smoking, I just cannot tolerate it around me anymore. Electronic cigarettes are NOT a nuisance in any way, shape, or form. Technically, it can't even really be called "smoking", because there is no smoke.
Hell yeah! Don't tread on me!
Note that Barry banned soldiers from farting in the presence of the people of Afghanistan……
The instant they tried to jump to "Third hand smoke" they revealed just how far over the shark they had jumped.
Yeah, they really went to "third hand smoke". Jeeeeez.
you're arguing that because we can't control EVERYTHING that a person might do to be olfactorily annoying to fellow passengers, that we should allow ANYTHING? i'd LOVE to be able to sort people by their propensity to annoy others- there would be a 'too much perfume/cologne/body odor' section, an overweight section (why make those of us who don't take up more than our share of space suffer? let them crowd each other), etc., but only within the confines of public transit. the right to swing your arm- or waft your underarm odor, ends at exactly the same place- somebody else's nose. all i said is that if, IF, 'electronic cigarettes' have a potentially noxious smell to those nearby then they should not be allowed. (and btw- some airlines operating in the South Pacific DO ban durian fruit, because of its- to some- disgusting smell.)
also, to clarify- i'd be more than happy to allow airlines far more leeway in establishing their own policies in non-safety related areas. if somebody wants to fire up Carcinogenic AirWays and require chainsmoking in flight- go for it. if some entrepreneur wants to cash in on the obesity epidemic in this country with WideLoad Wings & Cargo ("Where your overweight baggage is always welcome!")- more power to you.
You're conservative?
Amen
Talk about convoluted logic. What does what John Conyers reads have to do with electronic smoking, other than giving you an opportunity to get a dig in? You then go on to accuse the author of wanting to have phone sex ala Weiner. You seem to be projecting some of your own issues.
Yes…and don't even get me started on the millions that have died due to the do-gooders and their attack on DDT. Talk about junk science.
One of my coworkers has an electronic cigarette and there are no problems. Both my parents smoked when I was young and I'm very sensitive to the smell, but his e-cig did not effect me at all. Every once in a while I'd smell rootbeer or strawberries, but that was because of the flavors he was using and that even depended on the intensity. Once he got the mixture right, there was no external smells whatsoever.
I don't know if this is just "the left" doing this, but the overprotective government trying to stifle what we do. Get out of my products and let me decide who to support. The market will decide if the Government would get out of the way.
Here's hoping for smooth sailing in your efforts!
It reveals something I’ve always suspected about the anti-smoking crowd: they are more concerned with people having fun, than they are about health
I 100% agree. They are brown shirts beating their chests about protecting us all from higher health care costs when, in reality, they just want to squeal on someone being different.
Note they never go after athletes who routinely cost billions in health care costs not including the fact they live longer which is a burden on socialized retirement and all the bike paths, running paths, stadiums, parks etc we are forced to pay for or subsidize.
Some trolls frequent their leftwing sites in order to boost their numbers, then come here to post asinine ideas.
Property rights are subserviant to the States Control of the Population. I am sure they are reading the George Orwell version of the TSA regulations.
Potentially? Do you think that the Islamists would have overlooked this matter? Cell phones also, reportedly, explode in peoples pockets and there are videos on youtube of people popping pop corn with them.
Do you think that cell phone signals from cell phone towers interfere with navigation? Whatever the reason(s) the FAA has for banning the use of cell phones on aircraft, I am grateful to not have to suffer anyone else's soliloquy. Don't let the muslims know about that other hazard
Is the premise of this thread not about Happiness? A Hockey Stick adjustment remains, illogical.
"Electronic Cigarettes are neither dangerous nor illegal" Compare and contrast Prohibited with Illegal? Here's a link for the notice for proposed rule making, go get 'em Tim! http://cryptome.org/0005/dot091511.htm
Using a cell phone on a plane is dangerous"
How so? I expect that a device the size of a cell phone might be configured as some sort of IED or remote detonator. The frequencies used for navigation and communication are very explicitly defined and they are in no manner similar to those required of cell phones. Moreover, imagine what would happen if a low flying aircraft was to get within signal range of a cell phone or cell phone tower?
As to masturbation in public, well, you're the comedian so I won't expand on what an Obama speech is to the ears of intractable liberals, Chris Matthews notwithstanding. But, somebody might be phucking with somebody–stimulus withstanding. Getting a Lewinski in the Oval Office is not sex… I would ask for a different seat if the passenger beside me was doing more under that blanket than reaching for a cell phone.
"Electronic Cigarettes are neither dangerous…" nor health promoting! An electronic nebulizer designed as a mechanism for delivering nicotine into your lungs, with the specific purpose of crossing the blood/brain barrier, in order to stimulate neurological activity derived from metabolizing nicotine is not devoid of other implications:
see http://www.medicinenet.com/nicotine/page2.htm There is a reason why people will leave the warmth and comfort of their home on a cold Minnesota night just to obtain vegetable matter to burn while drawing the nicotine into their lungs. The lungs do NOT enjoy or benefit from the ingestion of nicotine, whether from a nebulizer or otherwise.
However, when I buy a ticket, I own my seat for the duration of hte flight… I should be able to do what I want with that property, while I own it. Not saying smoking on a plane should be allowed, just pointing out this caveat…
Follow the money. Have you noticed the GOP keeping silent about it? They like their big tobacco donations.
FYI… South Pacific isn't part of the USA.
I think people in this country (like you) are taking stuff like this to an extreme. I have the right to do whatever I want until I intrude on your rights. Where does that stop? I can paint my car yellow… unless you don't like yellow because it makes your eyes hurt? No. Not liking something is not a reason to ban others from doing it.
The premise of the thread is pursuit of happiness. John Conyers finds happiness in viewing pornography as a coach class passenger on commercial airliners. The author laments not being able to find happiness by gratifying a desire to consume nicotine in a prohibited manner, as a passenger on commercial airliners.
Recite the words wherein I "accuse the author of wanting to have phone sex ala Weiner."
Projecting my own issues? Sure. That has to be it. If you have nothing to add to a thread, you can always through out an ad hominem.
Cell phones poping popcorn? You believe that? That is a hoax. Try it… you'll see it doesn't work!
I've been in the wireless industry (engineering) for 16 years. Cell phone towers interfereing with navigation? Maybe if the tower was built at the end of a runway. No. There's many towers right next to airports… no RF problems.
Yes, FAA has for banning the use of cell phones on aircraft… no problem. Besides at 30,000 ft… you'll have problems getting a signal. And the answer is still "potentially".
The United States is turned in to two nations.
1. One nation where people think that government will solve all your problems and provide for every need.
2. Another nation where people just want to be left alone.
It's always been about the smell. That's all the anti-smoking fanatics have ever cared about. They'll deny it, of course, because they know it makes them look like self centered cry babies. But that's all it's ever been about.
Instead of buying into political propaganda, look at actual contribution figures.
"Big Tobacco" isn't a player in the political contribution game. "Big Tobacco" isn't even in the top 140 "Big Hitters" List.
http://www.opensecrets.org/orgs/list.php
In the 2010 election cycle, Unions gave almost $57 million in political contributions. Tobacco only $2.5 million.
Blazing Saddles…..
"It's always been about the smell."
Then why are they trying to ban water vapor?
You can see clearly from this idiotic new development that it has never been a matter of protecting anybody from anything.
It is about having an excuse to attack people.
There are all too many people in this world that simply have a large appetite for condemning and attacking the people around them. But they need an excuse to get away with it.
None of this crap is reasoning. It's all rationalization.
no, you're just renting it, with all the attendant limitations of temporary occupancy. you don't "own" jacksh!t.
To rent is to take ownership for a set period of time. Just like renting a house. You agree to the terms of the actual owner, but the actual owner cannot just come and go at will because the renters take posession during the contract period.
I do agree with you… I do wish the airlines would be able to run their own business, free from government control and oversight…
Actually it wasn't a ban, but a "policy". Of course, I had to e-mail my ex-husband who's over there right now and plead with him not to cause an international incident.
LOL!
Then he told me a story about some kids they were near during a patrol. He let one go, the kid giggled hysterically and then let one go and they had a little farting sing-a-long. I guess the higher ups don't really know what they are talking about. Farting is universal humor apparently.
Because the "Ferral" Government hasn't yet figured out how to tax it……and that annoys the piss out of them……
Actually, they can. Apartment complexes routinely enter an apartment to do maintenance and spray for rodents. They don't need your permission to enter, and they have a key.
Look, it boils down to this. You can choose to not fly. You can rent a private jet, rent a car, drive your own car, ride an Amtrak (LOL), walk, ride a bike, or jog, like Forrest Gump. What if someone finds your incessant whining about their cigarette, their BO or cologne to be annoying and infringing on their happiness, can they then ban you from flying? Slippery slope.
It's interesting you compare masturbating in public (which breaks several indecency laws) to puffing on air (which, thank God) is still legal. Until the EPA gets its way, that is.
Yeah, I read somewhere that if you smoked at all during your life, and wound up with lung cancer, its automatically attributed to cigarettes, even if you hadn't smoked in 20 years. If you live or frequent a place with smokers, and you don't smoke, but you end up with lung cancer, it's from cigarettes, even if you haven't lived or been to a place with cigarettes for 20 years. It's weird, and kinda sad.
"There's no smoke to bother me and the guy who needs a nicotine fix on a long fight is covered."
Yeah, watching a guy smoke a fake cigarette is better than not letting him smoke and getting socked in the jaw for incessantly whining how you are being bothered.
Those are things agreed to in the contract. Apartment complexes make sure they have the right to enter a dwelling for maintenance purposes… If you rent a house, for example, the owner cannot come over whenever he wants and cook himself something in the microwave.
There is no comparison and none was intended, between the the specific behaviors that you are attempting to correlate. The comment has entirely to do with the central theme of the article, Happiness and/or the pursuit thereof. Read the first paragraph. "Pursuit of Happiness is my favorite unalienable right, and a cornerstone of American exceptionalism…" After which a contention is made that someone has been denied that "right" by limitation of some particular activity, in this case the use of an e-cigarette within the confines of commercial airline traffic. The article concludes with "But to the Left, pursuit of happiness is no longer a right."
The limited use of a prohibited device or product or behavior while on a commercial airline does not sustain an argument that an unalienable right has been thwarted.
LOL no, I suppose he can't. However, if it's in the contract, he can. Do you honestly believe when you buy a plane ticket, you own that seat? How about when you rent a taxi? Is it yours? What about a ticket to Six Flags? Do you now own the park for a day?
Government is there FOR oversight, to make sure someone is screwing someone else. But I agree about the control. Government shouldn't be in the business of "control".
That's true, I do remember that. They were trying to say that simply the smell of smoke on someone's clothing, for example — would give you cancer. Completely nuts and they were trying to sell it as science.
so, holo, you're licking off cheap perfume…?
Sorry couldn't resist…
I wish, lets divide the sucker up. The lefties can have the coasts and we'll take the fly-over country. I wonder how long they'll last?
quit or die
These are the ONLY choices provided by the nanny state elite.
After all, they know better than you how to run your life.
A more apt way to describe the Right and the Left is as the Right and the Self-Righteous.
I know exactly what you mean. I have trouble talking about or posting about that subject because I get too angry.
if it smells like cologne , your not in Kansas anymore.
Reread the article, my comments and your own response. There is nothing in any of it that gives rise to a constitutional discourse. Not being able to behave in a manner prohibited, despite thwarting one's ability to achieve or even pursue happiness, by inhaling nicotine mist from a nebulizer does not make a case for a challenge to doctrine.
Whatever your fixation is with public masturbation has nothing to do with the article, my comments or other responses. In the words of topical interest, to wit Gen. Honore, don't get stuck on stupid.
If you want to argue the case, I have provided a link to communicate with FAA.
Love my ecigs. Love them so much I started a new company to sell them….LOL. vaprz. com, not sure if that will be allowed and post….LOL. As for any smell. Well…. freaking barely. I've been playing around with mixing my own eJuice flavors (the liquid nicotine that's used in these things) and the last custom mix I did was a mint chocolate menthol (love the minty-ness) with a tiny bit of tobacco flavoring. Vaped it (what you call smoking an ecig) at the office at my day job…. and an ex-smoker in the office said…. he could just barely smell a tiny bit of what he thought was a good cigar smoke…..LOL. If you're vaping something cherry flavored…. same deal. If you blow it in someone face… then they'll smell it for sure…. but it's nothing anywhere close to someone that's bathed themselves in cheap perfume before hopping on a plane. Have vaped on flights from Texas to Reno and Portland Maine. You're actually not "supposed" to do it according to Jet Blue and Continental…. but if you're subtle about it… nobody will notice. Just so you know… the ejuice consists of either a Propylene Glycol (PG)and/or Vegetable Glycerine (VG) base, nicotine, flavoring, water and sometimes some alcohol. Both PG and VG have been used in food products for eons now. The more VG in the mix the more vapor production depending on your ecig. If you're flying get something that has little to no VG in it as it will produce less vapor (smoke) and be less noticeable. Once again… smell is not strong at all. Maybe think of it like this…. your boyfriend/girlfriend, husband or wife not long out of the shower. You know that just barely soapy smell on them…. (if they use a normal soap ….LOL)…. well… it's subtle smelling like that.
Did you, or did you not post this earlier. "Congressboy John Conyers obtains happiness while viewing pornography on airplanes. Because printed pornography is not malodorous, and it makes him happy, surely it must be Ok. ***Imagine if he also masurbated to that pornography?*** "Stewardess? Could you bring me a blanket, a box of kleenex and a martini, please?""
You had a whole paragraph devoted to masturbation on an airline, weirdo. Now you say you never brought it up.
You then ask another commenter to: "Recite the words wherein I "accuse the author of wanting to have phone sex ala Weiner."
Going back to the very first post you have on this thread, lo and behold: "I hope that you can refrain from your electronic cigarettes until such opportunity presents for you to enjoy that martini and maybe even have phone sex a'la Weiner."
Maybe you should put your shirt back on. You seem to be suffering from heat stroke.
"The unalienable right that WAS and IS thwarted is the right of the Airline to regulate what goes on within their property"
You might develop that theory somewhat more. I'd offer an analogy, dealing specifically with transportation and the DOT, but you clearly do not deal well with analogy.
Backtracking? Why couldn't you stay on topic and develop your own case? I am not retracting a single word. I make no apology nor accept any responsbility for the perceived alienation that you or Mr. Slagle may experience in the pursuit of happiness.
Good luck getting your taxes back, ACORN has community programs to help. (that's supposed to be a joke, you might not get it)
The airlines and passengers are already self-regulating electronic cigarettes on airplanes, so this legislation is totally unecessary. See http://ecigwerks.blogspot.com/ for more.
It's not so much the left that gets torqued off about e-cigs, it's the super anal-retentive. Sometimes they are one and the same, but not always. Anal-retentives are worst than lefties believe it or not. They drive statism more than anyone because they hate freedom and fun, especially when someone else has it. I realized that when I was in New Mexico and some old biddy in the legislature was making a career out of outlawing cockfighting. She succeeded and the harmless fun of cockfighting is no longer among one of the freedoms there.
Look, it's increasingly obvious that having a rational discussion with you is out of the question. You think it's perfectly fine for the state to come in and tell a private business owner what behavior is/is not allowed within their property. I agree with Mr. Slagle that it's more nanny statism.
Isn't the head of the Department of Transportation a republican? Ray Lahood. Maybe you need to do a little research before you blame the left for everthing. So , the right and the republican want to ban e cigs on planes, not the left. Or is everything the lefts fault, even when it isn't?
You must be logged in to post a comment.