The current anti-smoking campaign
is not about public health or drug abuse...

It is about CONTROL... They want it!

Abolition of Individual Rights

The proposed tobacco settlement between the tobacco industry and the government was a massive assault on individual rights. Under its terms, the government becomes the de facto owner of all the tobacco companies; the nominal owners will just follow Washington's orders. The tobacco settlement established a precedent for totalitarian control over legally functioning businesses.

While maintaining a facade of private ownership, the government wants the control over every aspect of people's lives.

Socialism is government ownership and/or control over the basic means of production and distribution of services and goods. This means the government controls everything, including you. Socialism, like Communism, is a consolidate and control the wealth program; not a share-the-wealth program as many would have you believe.

With the demise of the agreed tobacco settlement, the U.S. government stepped forward with their own plan called the National Tobacco Policy and Youth Smoking Reduction Act, sponsored by Senator John McCain, whereby not only do they intrude into yet another American industry, but they raise taxes on the most vulnerable in our society to pay for it.

The government owns and/or controls the basic means of production and distribution of services and goods. We are told that business and other things will be regulated but that we will still be free. Free to do what? They will operate under the illusion of a free enterprise system. All business and land, if not owned by the government or the rich, is controlled and taxed very heavily. What a contradiction of terms. How can anyone have a Socialist form of government with freedom? As stated, in a Socialist form of government the rich rule and have the power, not the people.

To evade charges of violating the companies' freedom of speech, the government has coerced tobacco companies to "consent" — under threat of further extortion — to waive their constitutional rights.


Advertising is censored for content while the Marlboro Man and Joe Camel was outlawed. The state can forbid tobacco companies from using outdoor advertising, sponsoring public events, imprinting their logos on non-tobacco products (such as T-shirts), or employing any color other than black in their print ads.

Other examples of the "state" controlling private businesses include:

• States attorneys general have coerced major credit card companies to not accept credit cards to buy cigarettes over the Internet.
• The world's largest shipping carrier, UPS Inc., was forced to stop delivering cigarettes to individuals in the U.S. under an agreement with New York Atty. Gen. Eliot Spitzer.
• Private companies are required to report individual's online purchasing behaviors to state and local authorities.

They say they don't care what adults do voluntarily as they make these choices as an adult. But they get angry when these things are pushed at children who haven't yet formed their own opinions. Huh?

I wonder where that argument is when the issue is abortion or homosexuality? Feminists and other liberals say a woman should have the right to kill an unwanted baby in her womb, but that same woman does not have the right to smoke a cigarette at work or in a restaurant? Liberal activists would say Little Johnny should have the right to have sex with little Bobby, but neither one of them are allowed to buy cigarettes?

What mindless politically correct hypocrisy!

The liberal Children's Defense Fund (CDF) supports school-based clinics which shuttle pregnant girls to abortion mills without their parent's knowledge.

Surely you remember Joyclyn Elders who wanted to teach children to masterbate, or Donna Shalala's dancing condoms on TV promoting to our youth so-called "safe-sex", or Hillary Clinton who said, "Children should have a right to be permitted to decide their own future if they are competent." "Decisions about motherhood and abortion, schooling, cosmetic surgery, treatment of venereal disease, or employment, and others where the decision or lack of one will significantly affect the child's future should not be made unilatrally by parents."

Right! And these are the people who want you to belive they care about your children. I for one don't buy it! They have another agenda besides your children.

These deceptive politicians pushing this socialist takeover of the tobacco industry says it promotes the "public good." Individual Americans are losing their right to make their own choices, allowing the government to decide what is good for us and forcing us to live accordingly. Smoking individuals don't have a gun pointed at their heads saying smoke or chew. They made the choice, and they should be responsible for that choice.

If we Americans continue to allow our government to justify this, what is next? Any product that can be used, or misused, in any way that conceivably threatens the "public good" could become a candidate for state takeover. Why shouldn't government regulate sunbathing and outlaw ads for beach resorts, on the grounds that sunlight can cause skin cancer? Why shouldn't Washington tell us what to eat, how to dress and when to exercise? Why shouldn't they — in order to protect us against ideas incompatible with the "public good" — dictate the content of books, movies and television shows? Who's next?

What's Next?

Will the socialist Democrats soon be outlawing saturated fat? "No more butter or bacon for you, you greedy overweight sociopath!" Look out, it's not that far away. Already, they're beginning their campaign of turning public opinion against fat people. According to the Roche in Obesity web site, "Obesity is an international health problem. Now recognised as a chronic disease, obesity is a leading cause of illness, including hypertension, hyperlipidemia, cardiovascular disease, diabetes, and cancer. Throughout the world, healthcare organisations and government sponsored initiatives are seeking to reverse the alarming rise in obesity and reduce the huge medical, social, and financial toll that it causes." To heighten the urgency of the 'crisis,' U.S. government studies found that 33% of adults and 27% of the children in the U.S. are obese using a new method of calculating who is overweight. It is called Body Mass Index. With the many alleged health problems and costs for obesity related medical problems, the money grabbers aren't far behind.

The meat packing industry is already under the scrutiny of the tax-and-spenders.

The People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals web site has a portion devoted to the health problems associated with eating meat. They say, eating animal products is harmful to human health. People who eat meat are at least 30 percent more likely to die of a heart attack, 40 percent more likely to get cancer, and at increased risk for many other diseases and illnesses, including stroke, obesity, appendicitis, osteoporosis, arthritis, diabetes, and food poisoning. Additionally, meat contains accumulations of pesticides and other chemicals up to 14 times more concentrated than those found in plant foods. They make the wild claim that, "America's meat-based diet costs this country billions of dollars in health care costs and billions more in environmental destruction."

If removing from public view Joe Camel and the Marlboro Man is such a positive thing in reducing child smokers, what about the Budweiser frogs that presumably encourage our children to become addicted to alcohol? Will Ronald McDonald be banned because he encourages children to clog their hearts with high cholesterol junk food? Those evil ad men at McDonald's are using those "Happy Meal" promotions to get our kids hooked on high-fat burgers and fries! Our children are being victimized!! They're going to die from heart attacks. Raise taxes on fast food and 60 percent more children will eat their broccoli!

I suppose the anti-coffee (raises blood pressure) fanatics are not too far off.
Maybe vitamins should be banned because studies have shown that taking them, especially Vitamin B1 can cause cancer.

Targeting cigar smokers, a recent study claims smoking one cigar a day appears to increase the risk of death from coronary heart disease by 30 percent in men aged 75 and younger. The study of 121,738 men aged 30 and older began in 1982 and ended in 1991. Men who had smoked cigarettes or pipes were excluded from the study as were men who had been diagnosed with heart disease or diabetes when the study began. During the study, men who smoked at least one cigar a day were 30-percent more likely to die of heart disease than nonsmoking counterparts, the study found. No increased risk of premature death was found among cigar smokers aged 75 and older or for men who had given up smoking cigars. [The Detroit News, Nov. 24, 1999]

Funded by their windfall profits in state tobacco cases, the same cigarette bustin legal team that challenged the tobacco industry has reunited and is now targeting its next cash cow, five of the nation's largest HMOs, accusing them of unscrupulous business practices. The lawsuits, filed in Mississippi where the first state tobacco case originated, seek class-action status on behalf of the 32 million people who are members of Pacificare Health Systems Inc., Foundation Health Systems Inc., Cigna Healthcare, Prudential Health Care and Humana Inc. "This again appears to be one of many lawsuits that will ultimately drive up health care costs for consumers by forcing HMOs through unwarranted, costly and protracted litigation," Alan Hoops, head of Pacificare, said. [The Arizona Republic, Nov. 25, 1999]