John Archer wrote:
But there's a flip side to that: non-smokers should give smokers a break. After all, smokers are VERY generously paying, in part, non-smokers' tax bills.
Give it up though, Rosie. If it makes you feel better, spend some of your cost savings on stink bombs and drop one anywhere you see a NO SMOKING sign. Take your own needs into account first though. If you are in a restaurant say, then only drop one on your way out. But first check that I'm not around when you do, please.
Ah John, thank you for the kind words, especially as I'm one of those 'non-persons' a smoker, it warms my heart that not everyone reviles me.
Forgot to say, even though they were kind words, especially in view of most words aimed at us, I could still detect a hint of distain for smokers. Never mind though, any kind word is welcome.
Give up, afraid not, contrary to popular belief, I actually ENJOY my ciggies, enjoyment is not known to zealous smoke haters.
Personally I'd prefer they made tobacco illegal altogether so that those that treat me as something left on the bottom of their shoe will have to pay a hell of a lot more tax to make up for lost tobacco revenue. I'd cut off my nose in spite to see this. Because I'd still get my ciggies, one way or another, if you get my drift.
BTW: for a real insight into the anti-smoking hatred campaign look into the Godber blueprint (WHO included of course) from the early 60's/70's, you'll see it's being played out to the letter.
This is below just about sums up the liars & hypocrites.http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/827172/posts
BISMARCK - North Dakota House representatives Monday voted overwhelmingly against a bill proposing to ban tobacco sales in the state.
Belter told the House that committee members were frustrated last week with the testimony from anti-tobacco groups that testified against the tobacco ban, including the North Dakota Medical Association, American Heart Association, American Cancer Society, American Lung Association, North Dakota Public Health Association and North Dakota Nurses Association.
There's no evidence banning tobacco would prevent and reduce tobacco use because no such approach has been implemented, the groups argued.
The ban also could take away certain funding for these groups for tobacco control programs.
John, people think the AGW scam has many organisations dipping into the taxpayer coffers, not as many as the anti-smoking cartel. Just a taster below: There's thousands more off-shoots all getting rich off of a hate campaign that would make the old nazi regime green with envy. I'm just waiting for one of them to come up with the final solution for smokers.http://www.tobaccocontrolgrants.org/Pag ... anizationshttp://www.tobaccofreecenter.org/