Clearing The Air

Sunday, October 28, 2007

MN smoking bans continue closing bars and restaurants as local hospitality unemployment figures continue to increase

State unemployment figures can be found here.

There were 1,2oo additional job losses in the hospitality sector in September 2007. The last time Clearing the Air posted hospitality job losses was to report the loss of 2,100 jobs in April 2007 as reported by MN State unemployment figures.

MN smoking bans have eliminated 137+ hospitality businesses, it's a fact of life that those business losses will add to the state's number of unemployed hospitality workers.

But let's not let business losses and unemployment increases get in the way of a perfectly engineered social agenda.

It's funny, but I don't hear the American Lung Association of MN, the American Medical Association, Minnesota Non-Smoker's Rights, MPAAT / ClearWay MN, or any of the other Nicoderm funded lobbyists telling us that smoking bans are good for business any longer.......they reserved that false claim for politicians (prior to the bans of course).

Any lawmakers out there willing to admit they were lied to by the rent seeking lobbyists? Perhaps not, but only because they knew it was a lie when they first heard it in public testimony.

Saturday, October 27, 2007

Mpls Star Tribune tests the waters towards a new push for alcohol prohibition....ignoring the damages caused by the current smoking prohibition.

(The Star Tribune is quick to remove story links used online that don't coincide with their editorial agenda .....so highlights are shown below, the online link; if still available; can be found here.)

Speaking easy

Last update: October 27, 2007 – 4:09 PM

We visited some ....watering holes to ask local residents a few generations removed from the Bootlegging Era what they know about Prohibition and what they would do if it came back.

At W.A. Frost & Co., Kimberlie Rick, 25, of St. Paul, said she's a light drinker but "I definitely would fight" any effort to bring it back. "I definitely wouldn't just sit and accept it, [and] I would find a way to have a cocktail or glass of wine somehow. ... That battle has already been fought and lost. Isn't it almost like double jeopardy?"

Although Shonnie Brault, 37, works at Neumann's Bar in North St. Paul, home to a 1920s speakeasy/brothel...... But she admitted that she "would freak if it happened again. ... I'd cry [chuckles]. ... Wouldn't there be some serious riots and stuff?"

J.D. Strate, 27, of Minneapolis, was at Gluek's with a dozen friends. "Actually, those speakeasies sound like a lot of fun. But Prohibition was definitely not the best idea the government ever had. People our age want to go out and get together and drink beer. That's how I spend my entire weekends, with beer ......

The Star Tribune, like most print and news media these days, don't just happen to write a story to report the news or historical events. The new role of modern journalism is no longer about reporting the facts or headlines......it's about shaping public perception and opinion......to bring about policy changes. They are no longer impartial reporters they are advocates for political and social change.

So a Star Tribune story about alcohol prohibition coming on the heels of their successful editorial push for tobacco prohibition (smoking bans) seems less likely a special interest piece as much as a testing of the waters to see how and if the Star Tribune editorial board should pursue this new prohibition agenda.

Shamelessly, the Strib refuses to acknowledge the damages caused in the Twin Cities community from the current prohibition (smoking bans) they editorialized as necessary. 137 + hospitality establishments have since disappeared from the local landscape, taking some 5,000 -6,500 jobs in the process. Indicating that consequences from an ill conceived and unnecessary policy are not open to consideration nor debate from the elite, enlightened, and arrogant local media of record.

Meanwhile, the same "health advocates" Robert Wood Johnson Foundation (RWJF) who funded the smoking ban movement ($200+ million), have for years been quietly funding the new alcohol prohibition movement. It's just a coincidence that RWJF's parent company Johnson & Johnson manufactures tobacco substitute products Nicoderm, Nicoderm CQ as well as drugs to eliminate alcohol dependency.

Pay no attention to the rent seeking man behind the curtain this is an issue about public health.......and as whispered at the local speakeasy (pharmaceutical profits).

Friday, October 26, 2007

Increased tobacco taxes do not deter smokers and is a disasterous way to fund government programs

The story of New York smokers who dodge the tobacco tax is found online here.

Excerpt:

New York City's smokers dodged as much as $43 million of cigarette taxes last year......

"Twenty percent of smokers without high school diplomas reported evading cigarette taxes, compared with more than 60 percent for those with college degrees," .............some 34 percent of other state residents said they got "under-taxed" smokes via the Internet or Indian reservations..............the report ....concluded: "The availability of under-taxed and therefore cheaper cigarettes undermines the city's efforts to reduce smoking and deprives the city of funds that would be otherwise directed towards public health initiatives."

This study proves two things:

1) increased tobacco taxes do not produce the claimed desired effect......decreased smoking.

2) funding governemnt programs with a tobacco tax is a recipe for revenue shartfalls.

Recent Democratic attempts to fund the expansion of S-CHIPS on a new federal tobacco tax will be as equally disasterous. According to the results of the New York study, the $35 billion expansion of S-CHIPS; allowing income earners up to $82,000.00 without children qualify for "free healthcare"; will in reality be paid by non-smoking taxpayers.

President Bush was right to veto this over bloated spending bill the first time.......and I am confident he will continue to veto this bill as it stands, no matter how many times Democrats vote for it.

Thursday, October 18, 2007

President Bush's S-CHIP veto prevails, Democratic lawmaker apoplectic

President Bush prevails with his veto of an out of control spending bill known as S-CHIPS expansion. In a deranged response, Democratic lawmaker Rep. Pete Stark makes a fool of himself and his party.

WASHINGTON — Democratic Rep. Pete Stark launched a shocking one-man assault on the Bush administration Thursday, interrupting floor debate before a failed attempt to override President Bush's veto of the so-called SCHIP bill to suggest that U.S. troops in Iraq are getting their heads "blown off for the president's amusement."

As a very proud parent of one of those brave soldiers in Iraq, I am outraged at this representative's vitriolic and juvenile tantrum. What does the President's veto of an unnecessary, overbloated spending bill have to do with Iraq, or defending this nation from terrorists?

The abusive hatred of the anti-Bush, anti-military Democratic Party is teetering on treasonous. These deranged liberals are so blinded by their hatred of President Bush and the U.S. military that they don't seem to care about the aid and comfort they provide to our enemy. It is this same enemy who will, without hesitation, slit the throats of these pacifist, atheist, anti-moral progressives; before the U.S. military they loathe; has an opportunity to defend them. And quite frankly, were I in charge of the U.S. military I would order our troops not to defend these liberal traitors.

Be careful who you attack you panty waisted Democratic Party goers........you may find yourselves in the clutches of our enemies with nobody to defend you.

Wednesday, October 17, 2007

The Heartland Institute disputes the former Surgeon General's claim....."the debate is over...."

Some excerpts from the Heartland's brilliant and insightful article:

Who's Claiming Consensus?

.....The commentators who echo the Surgeon General's claim fall into one or more of five groups:

-Liberal advocacy groups such as the Center for Tobacco Free Kids, American Cancer Society, and American Legacy Foundation, which clearly profit from increased public attention to secondhand smoke.

-Government agencies, including the Office of the Surgeon General, the Department of Health and Human Services, and EPA, which exist largely for the purpose of discovering and publicizing health risks, even if they are backed by dubious research.

-Some corporations--notably Johnson & Johnson, which makes smoking-cessation aids--which give liberal advocacy groups hundreds of millions of dollars to demonize smoking and compel more consumers to use their products.

-The news media, which simply publish the news releases from the first three groups.

-Politicians, who read the newspaper stories and hear from the advocacy groups and rationally calculate their odds of being reelected improve if they proclaim deep concern over secondhand smoke and propose solutions that will cost taxpayers and consumers billions of dollars annually.

The idea that smokers and nonsmokers might solve this problem voluntarily is dismissed out of hand by those who claim secondhand-smoke exposure is a public health crisis. The "solutions" they want all require bigger government: higher taxes on cigarettes, bans on smoking in public, restrictions on advertising and health claims, etc.

Oddly, these solutions all work to advance the self-interest and agendas of the five groups that repeat Carmona's claim of "consensus." What are the odds this correlation is coincidental?

It is particularly satisfying for me to have an organization of clout, like the Heartland Institute, point out the special interest corporate involvement behind the smoking ban movement.

Reading this article reminded me that somebody else recently made the same false claim as former Surgeon General Richard Carmona "..The debate in the scientific community is over......"

However, as I have indicated numerous times, Carmona and Gore cited studies & theories fraught with bias, error, and the deliberate orchestration to support their pre-ordained agenda.

Proper scientific methodology conducts studies and testing to determine the facts, only then can scientists determine the proper response or agenda. Carmona, tobacco control activists, and Gore formulated their agenda first and then cherry picked and manipulated data to support that agenda......that's hardly scientific or a consensus.

Monday, October 15, 2007

How long before smoking ban activists condemn the hazards of holy secondhand smoke?

This fiery figure is being hailed as Pope John Paul II making an appearance beyond the grave.

The image, said by believers to show the Holy Father with his right hand raised in blessing, was spotted during a ceremony in Poland to mark the second anniversary of his death.

The rest of the story can be found online here.

If health concerns were the real impetus for smoking bans, there would be consistent condemnation of secondhand smoke no matter what the ignition source wood, charcoal, tobacco or holy smoke.

It is however no coincidence that smoking ban activists and their financial backers RWJF, Johnson & Johnson Co. (Nicoderm manufacturer) are only concerned enough to eliminate tobacco smoke; not wood or charcoal.

As for secondhand pontiff smoke we'll just have to wait and see......but it's a safe bet that if there's no profit in banning it, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation / J & J Company and the activists they employ won't waste their time.

Minnesota bar & restaurant owner has a message for tobacco control activists & lawmakers they employ

The sign reads: Smoking Nazis & MN Lawmakers......BITE ME!

Many establishment owners cower to the tobacco control activists and the puppet lawmakers in their employ......but not Duffy.

As you can see Duffy's owner is an American patriot who feels there is no shame in standing up against tyranny and injustice. The smoking ban is merely the latest and most damaging travesty of justice. The adverse effects on businesses and jobs in Minnesota is well documented, here and here.

135+ bars and restaurants have closed since smoking bans took effect here, adding approximately 5,000 - 6,500 job losses to the local economy. Many, including the local media, have refused to acknowledge the damages caused by these special interest smoking ban laws.......but not Duffy.

So we at Clearing the Air encourage freedom loving Americans who still understand what it means to stand up for your rights, with backbone and conviction to stop by and meet the man who refuses to cower to the pharmaceutical funded smoking ban activists and the lawmakers they control.

The pussification of America marches on......but not in Osseo, MN. & certainly not at Duffy's Bar & Grill.

Monday, October 08, 2007

More proof that smoking bans are destroying the hospitality industry across the nation

This article cites at least $16.8 million in economic damages due to the smoking ban in the state of Colorado.

Meanwhile the pharmacautical nicotine entities who fund the smoking ban lobbyists get fatter. And the media and politicians try to ignore the economic damages.

Now it's clear what the lobbyists meant when they continually testified before lawmakers "smoking bans are good for business" they're good for business as long as your business is selling Nicoderm, Nicotrol, Chantix, etc.

Friday, October 05, 2007

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton plays politics with the economy

Regarding todays unemployment news, Hillary wasted little time in trying to capitalize on the issue:

.....Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who is vying for her party's presidential nomination, called the new employment figure disappointing and said it was evidence that "the Bush administration's simplistic supply-side economic strategy is not working for working Americans." .......

However, Clinton earlier stated if elected president she favors a nationwide smoking ban.....which will only increase the number of unemployed Americans, as evidenced here, here, and here.

Further to note, her comment "......supply-side economic strategy is not working....." exposes her ideology; she does not believe in free market forces and instead seems to favor socilaism, as evidenced by her continued push for universal healthcare.

Thursday, October 04, 2007

Smoking ban saves factory workers from the hazards of secondhand smoke

However, as you can see, secondhand smoke is the least of these workers' concerns.

I happened to be at a manufacturing facility today to help design an air filtration solution to remove welding smoke created during production processes. More than one employee as well as the owner explained that the local health department stopped by recently to inform them that the new smoking ban forbids anyone from smoking in their facility. I hope I don't need to point out the hypocrisy and senseless logic in this policy.

Not only have I designed and engineered air filtration solutions for 17 years now, I also have monitoring equipment to measure air quality levels regarding indoor air pollutants. And I guarantee you that welding smoke levels are far more hazardous and in higher concentration than secondhand tobacco smoke.

As a matter of fact, environmental health department air quality testing of Twin Cities bars & restaurants found that secondhand smoke levels are 15 -500 times safer than OSHA permissible exposure limits (pel). While British Medical Journal published air quality test results prove that secondhand smoke is 2.6 - 5,000 times safer than OSHA permissible exposure limits (pel).

So why aren't pro-smoking ban lawmakers introducing laws that require welding smoke levels to be 2.6 - 5,000 times safer than OSHA permissible exposure limits?

The answer is simple, facts and air quality test results of secondhand smoke are not allowed to interfere with the nanny-fascist agenda. But more importantly, the lobbying groups who demand smoking bans are heavily funded by pharmaceutical nicotine (Nicoderm) interests.......these same rent seeking lobbyists have not yet found a way to capitalize on welding smoke patches.

(Ventilation equipment is allowed in the industrial workplace to improve air quality, why not in the commercial workplace?)

Also visit our sponsors at bottom of webpage

Boycott these special interests (J & J) who destroyed the hospitality industry & jobs

Why does UCSF researcher Stanton Glantz support smoking bans?

The beginning of a revolution

"Though we may not be able to protect your business property rights, we certainly support your Second Amendment Rights"

Statcounter