Coming Soon to Wisconsin: KY-Coated Smoking Ban
December 3rd, 2007
No sooner had I written my post about no longer having any guilt for smoking, did Governor Doyle decide to cater to special-
interests and spit on private property rights by calling for a statewide smoking ban.
Doyle said Wisconsin must act quickly to avoid becoming the “ashtray of the upper Midwest.” Both Illinois and Minnesota have recently passed comprehensive smoking bans.
Like all bad ideas borne of government oppression, Doyle’s proposal has its democrat supporters. Senator Roger Breske (D) is trying to play both sides, knowing full-well that the ban will cause tremendous harm to Wisconsin businesses…
Two senators working on reaching a deal _ Roger Breske, D-Eland, and Fred Risser, D-Madison _ met Monday and promised to talk again Wednesday. Breske, who wants an exemption for taverns, said he and Risser agreed not to talk about their discussions for now. One possible solution would be to phase-in the exemption for taverns.
“I feel that there is room for an agreement without causing undo harm to small business owners,” Breske said. “We all know it’s going to come down the road, but why do we have to shove it down their throat?”
Yeah! You tell ‘em, Breske! You big, badass democrat! You’ll just take our rights and livelihood away from us a little bit at a time, so we don’t really notice it so much. A kinder, gentler raping of rights. A KY-coated smoking ban, if you will. Where do I sign up for that sweet deal?
Let me make this clear: There is no compromise on private property rights. There’s no “deal” to be made, here. If a politician supports any part of a smoking ban on private property, they’re either being honest about squashing one of our most precious rights as American citizens, or they’re nothing but wimpy opportunists who simply want to stay in the best job they ever had.
Aside from the opportunistic politicians, we also have the special interest groups, who are the fuel that keeps the freedom-dissolving machine running:
It’s time for Wisconsin to join with 22 other states that ban smoking in bars and restaurants, said Aaron Doeppers, director of the Midwest region of the anti-smoking group Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids.
No, Aaron. I think we should ban sanctimonious do-gooders like you, who think Wisconsinites are too stupid or incoherent to make decisions for themselves.
I’m thinking of starting a ‘campaign’ of my own. I like to call it the “Campaign for Pretentiousness-Free Wisconsin”. All self-important asses will be driven into Illinois and Minnesota, where they can prance around in their little bicycle helmets, go into those “health spas” we here in Wisconsin like to call “bars”, drink fruit smoothies, and suck on flavored oxygen until they pass out from sheer healthiness. Then the rest of us will be free to go into grimy, greasy spoons and backwoods taverns, where we can drink, dance, listen to really loud music, and yes - even smoke - if we damn well feel like it.
I am absolutely livid (can you tell?) , and it’s not because I’m a smoker. It’s because these nanny do-gooders seem hell-bent on making criminals of law-abiding citizens, and turning the rest of populace into stool pigeons, all while Rome burns…and with false data and inconclusive studies, no less. Then, on top of that, they insult us by telling us that we can’t possibly make good, informed decisions on where we go to eat or drink. We can’t be trusted with ourselves, apparently.
Can’t these buffoons find something else to concern themselves with? Aren’t there other, more pressing issues in our state?
I guess I had forgotten that government is here to protect us from ourselves, not from actual threats like illegal immigrants and true criminals.
My Italian blood is boiling.









December 3rd, 2007 at 7:32 pm
Smoking ban - proof that we’ve solved too many problems in this country.
-Brad
http://www.clashofculture.com
December 3rd, 2007 at 8:48 pm
I hear you, brother.
December 10th, 2007 at 6:22 pm
Governments gone wild
The bandwagon of local smoking bans now steamrolling across the nation has nothing to do with protecting people from the supposed threat of “second-hand” smoke.
Indeed, the bans are symptoms of a far more grievous threat, a cancer that has been spreading for decades and is the only real hazard involved – the cancer of unlimited government power.
The issue is not whether second-hand smoke is a real danger or a phantom menace, as a study published recently in the British Medical Journal indicates. The issue is: if it were harmful, what would be the proper reaction? Should anti-tobacco activists satisfy themselves with educating people about the potential danger and allowing them to make their own decisions, or should they seize the power of government and force people to make the “right” decision?
Loudly billed as measures that only affect “public places,” they have actually targeted private places: restaurants, bars, and nightclubs, – whose customers are free to go elsewhere.
All decisions involve risks; some have harmful consequences; most are controversial and invite disapproval from the neighbours. But the individual must be free to make these decisions.
Yet when it comes to smoking, this freedom is under attack. Smokers are a minority, practising a habit considered annoying and unpleasant to the majority. So the majority has simply commandeered the power of government and used it to dictate their behaviour.
Smoke from tobacco is a statistically insignificant health risk.
http://tomneuville.com/index.php?s=second+hand+smoke
Thomas Laprade
480 Rupert St.
Thunder Bay, Ont.
December 10th, 2007 at 7:16 pm
AMEN, Thomas!!!!
Thanks for the link!!