Sunday, November 25, 2018

Perpetual Illogicality


Most of us have moral standards and use common sense. A lot of us are fundamentally honest, respectable and law-abiding. We indulge in our daily activities without inconveniencing and irritating other simple words, we just do our own thing. Usually, human beings are allowed to make decisions for themselves whether it's determining what colour they should paint their kitchen or making a more serious resolution such as skydiving. But then we have a government who takes extreme pleasure in making choices for the populace, for some bizarre purpose they "think" it's their social obligation to the citizens.

The government's viewpoint on smoking has always baffled and puzzled me. They are constantly and aggressively "advising" us how harmful smoking is, not just to smokers but to the folks who breathe in second-hand smoke. However, the "leadership" still allows the populace to participate in the habit. I think we all admit smoking can be very unhealthy, but nevertheless, I believe if individuals have a desire to smoke they should have every right to do so.

Some anti-smoking activists are of the opinion if people smoke they should pay their own health care. I completely disagree. What about the inhabitants who partake in activities like skiing, snow boarding, skydiving, teen-agers who are under 16 years old riding bicycles without wearing a helmet or the fucking idiots who stunt drive...I think you know where I'm going with this. Anyway, getting back to smoking, the government knows smoking is unwholesome so why doesn't "our caring" politicians ban smoking altogether.

Let's not forget how devious and crafty the group (who state they oppose smoking) can be in true form. It's very obvious the regime has declared war on smoking. They observe it as an evil crime and a national crisis. My E.A. (Executive Assistant) is a smoker and pays $118 (as of Nov. 2018, we all know it will increase) for a carton of Matinee King size cigarettes. Doesn't it daze you how phony the government can be? They say one thing but go against their morals on the flip side.

My E.A. is an avid reader, on an average she'll read one book a week. Her choice of fiction will vary from soft romance to conspiracy thrillers. Some while ago she brought to my attention a book she had just started to read titled "Fire Brand" by Diana Palmer. At the beginning of Diana's book, there was a page titled "Dear Reader" and she was talking about smoking and how it was totally accepted in the past and now it's in the same category as cocaine. What absolutely shocked me was when she said, "these days smoking is so taboo that I'm not even allowed to have a character who smokes in my books". Can you believe this outright insanity?

Smoking affects people in many different ways. I smoked for forty-five years and thoroughly enjoyed it especially drinking a cup of coffee, guzzling beer and after a big meal. I smoked a large (25 cigarettes) pack a day. When I indulged in adult beverages I could be easily up to two packs a day. Finally, my day had arrived. Most mornings I would be coughing, hacking and some times times I thought I was going to pass was very scary. There were a couple of occurrences that motivated me to finally give up the "butts".

I saw a doctor (he was a smoker for thirty-five years) who checked my lungs and breathing and said, "You have to quit smoking. I know it's tough but you have to quit." Sometime later I had a chest x-ray. I was extremely anxious (it was many years ago for my last x-ray) about the final outcome. When I received the results I was surprised and truly relieved and happy...they were negative. That day my smoking was terminated.

My mother (R.I.P. and God rest your soul) started smoking when she was sixteen years old and smoked till the day she died...she was in her ninety-third year. I think you will agree with me when I say back in the early days of our parents and our generation numerous people smoked. It absolutely infuriates me how Hollywood has jumped on the anti-smoking crusade. With movies set in the modern day, the audience will be lucky to see one or two characters smoking. What irritates me, even more, is when I watch movies that are set in the era from 1910-1980 and only twenty-five percent of the individuals are isn't true fact or history.

For example, two movies that enter my mind are "Public Enemies", 2009 and "Lawless", 2012. Both of these films were based on true stories, circa the 1930s. In my opinion, not enough people are smoking and therefore takes away the realism from the movie. During those years numerous people was part of their everyday lifestyle. So the next time a Vietnam movie is produced maybe we won't see the cigarette packs attached to the soldiers' helmets and out of a platoon of thirty or forty GI's we'll only notice one or two grunts smoking. It's very unworthy Hollywood is attempting to camouflage and hide a part of history.

I've never been a believer in second-hand smoke. For one reason I was brought up in that environment for twenty-five years...both my parents (R.I.P. and God rest your souls) smoked. I know I wasn't the only child to breathe in second-hand smoke. An article in C.B.C. radio Jan. 20/15 titled "Michael's Essay: Exploding the myth that second-hand smoke causes cancer" helps support my view on second-hand smoke is just a tall tale.

The write-up stated on a program called, "As It Happens" an E.P.A. (Environmental Protection Agency) employee was being asked about the harm of second-hand smoke and he/she said, "sure it's crappy science but I look at the outcome - a smoke-free America". The column also mentioned why don't anti-smoking activists stick to the facts instead of alarming everyone with the assertion that passive second-hand smoke causes lung cancer when it clearly doesn't. I would like to see the true, accurate and real statistics of restaurant and bar employees who were exposed to second-hand smoke and contracted any respiratory problems.

Don't you find it hilarious but moreover spineless the government bullying and using their usual extortion techniques making people pay outrageous, ridiculous and inflated prices for tobacco at convenience stores but the Indigenous populace can manufacture and sell their cigarettes at one-sixth of the absurd government price...without a doubt truly gutless and chicken-hearted.

Unquestionably all three levels are making it more annoying and irritating for people to smoke. It's quite similar to the bike lane rubbish automobile drivers have to tolerate with every day. I live in Hamilton, Ontario and find it utterly preposterous that folks can't smoke in parks. I shake my head in disgust...outright vomit. An article in CTV News on Feb. 25/17 said Health Canada wants to ban smoking in apartments, condominiums and post-secondary school campuses and raise the legal age of buying tobacco to twenty-one years old. The government stated tobacco costs $17 billion in health care and indirect economic cost. They also said 37,000 people die annually from smoking-related illnesses. I have a solution...why doesn't the government just ban tobacco?

An article in C.B.C. news on Nov. 21/17 reported Health Canada "calls for" a big tax hike on cigarettes. As of Nov. 21/17 taxes on smokes amounted to 68% but the government said they must raise the tax to 80% to get smoking levels down by 2036. Again, why not outlaw tobacco?

Lastly, C.B.C. news wrote on Nov. 15/17 a study found the smoking of contraband cigarettes increased more in 2017 than in the last four years. L.O.L. I wonder why. I'm assuming when the article referred to contraband that also included the purchases of cigarettes on native reservations. I have another recommendation, prohibit tobacco.

The marijuana "circus" is sure to create great amounts of pandemonium...a real sideshow once it becomes legalized. Originally the government stated that pot could only be smoked inside but later changed that ruling. Our "clever" bureaucrats want to forbid cigarette smoking in apartments but allow weed to be smoked in apartments. They better get their act together.


In my opinion sooner or later individuals will only be allowed to smoke inside their own residences. Smoking in your backyard, car or on the sidewalk will be forbidden. More absurdity and another infringement of our rights. The government is so two-faced I can't help but laugh at them. They constantly sermonize to us like a boisterous evangelist in the southern U.S. preaching to his congregation about the harmful dangers smoking causes. But do they really care? Seriously ask yourself that question. When did government care about anyone except for themselves. The boys and girls in Ottawa are nothing more than unreasonable hypocrites. Politicians, agencies, organizations and advocates all proclaim that smoking tobacco is just as bad as using heroin. Funny heroin is illegal but tobacco isn't. I wonder why? Would it be the caring authority worships and adores their tax money they receive. Would government actually lower themselves to that level? I think most of us know the answer to that question.

The End

The Harvenut Puritan Project

Thank You for Smoking

Heebie - Jeebies

Heebie - Jeebies It is not an arrogant government that chooses priorities, it's an irresponsible government that fails to choose. To...