ANTI-TOBACCO HYPOCRICY

Hypocricy in the anti-smoking camp starts at the top and filters all the way down. President Clinton and Arnold Schwarnegger, two of the prime spokesment against smoking, both enjoy puffing on cigars.

The same is true of Minnesota's new governor, Jesse Ventura, who hits the stogies when not appearing at the Minnesota Smoke Free Coalition's "Tobacco Prevention Day at the Capitol."

"Do as I say, not as I do" is apparently their motto.

This may help explain why it is only cigarettes that have been targeted for free-wheeling negative propaganda and exhorbitant taxation. Cigars and pipe smokers can, temporarily at least, be allowed some semblance of humanity while cigarette smokers are demonized to the nth degree.

Undoubtedly the highest level of hypocricy is reserved for the second hand smoke mirage. Despite repeated attacks, contrary court decisions and being disproven several times over, second hand smoke remains the center piece in their web of pretense and subterfuge.

It is the big lie from which they gained momentum in convincing the public at large that smokers pose a terrorist-like threat to the rest of the populace.

Emboldened by this whopper, the antis built a whole pretext of Public Health concerns to bolster their viscious rampage. Smoking has been blamed for every thing from arthritis, asthma, impotence, and premature aging to deafness and infant crib death syndrome.

And of course it is portrayed as a monstrous threat to children from which they must be protected at all costs -- to smokers.

Pro-smoking advocates are looked upon as chemical pedophiles intent on luring the kiddies into a life of smoke ravaged hell. The tobacco industry may well have had their sights on the future market represented by youth, but in the anti-scheme anyone representing smokers rights is accused of such intentions. Simply not true.

But then so much of the anti-tobacco pitch isn't. It should all be gathered together under one heading, "Anti-tobacco for Dummies."

And while we're at it -- Why did the attorneys from the state tobacco case pay hefty fees to have files pertaining to the case erased from their computers? Not simply deleted, but erased for security reasons.

They compelled the tobacco companies to produce their secret documents during the trial. Maybe they don't want the same thing to happen to them??



Return to Home Page