tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post4764678609722955533..comments2024-03-04T17:54:32.559+00:00Comments on Iain Dale's Diary: Charles Kennedy, Hypocrisy and ConsistencyIain Dalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03270146219458384372noreply@blogger.comBlogger67125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-45229378578492234052007-07-10T04:50:00.000+01:002007-07-10T04:50:00.000+01:00Can't we vote to ban Charlie Kennedy! What has he ...Can't we vote to ban Charlie Kennedy! What has he ever actually done of any note or worth - other than marry a wmen who went to university with my wife?Scipiohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06514885826616402615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-54703856640935881342007-07-08T16:43:00.000+01:002007-07-08T16:43:00.000+01:00I never said smoking was a good thing - I was just...I never said smoking was a good thing - I was just disagreeing with the claim that (for the smoker) it only serves to provide pure pleasure. <BR/><BR/>There are plenty of reasons that people smoke which are nothing to do with the physical addiction. Furthermore, if we end up facilitating those reasons (for example through creating small smoking areas where people can swap lighters til there hearts content) people will take advantage of it. <BR/><BR/>I also never said that smoking is *necessary* to provide social cohesion! Obviously there are many ways people make friends, I just recognise that if you create a situation where young people can ligitimately stand around outside a building at any time of day without needing any other explanation for their behaviour - they will start smoking so they can meet the opposite sex.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-66604575782804964562007-07-08T16:10:00.000+01:002007-07-08T16:10:00.000+01:00cee, As a non-smoker, I would like to apologise fo...cee, As a non-smoker, I would like to apologise for my anti-social, fractious behaviour. Still, I think I've found an alternative means of achieving that social cohesion, group identity and feeling of belonging - I'm off happy-slapping with the posse. Nice to know that "bringing people together" represents a redemptive, positive function to any behaviour.<BR/><BR/>(Before you rabid smokers start complaining that smoking and happy-slapping are not morally equivalent, that is not my point - it is that cee's use of group-cohesion as a reason why smoking is positive is bullshit.)bgpriorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00628170401069060830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-86064594402647137672007-07-08T14:54:00.000+01:002007-07-08T14:54:00.000+01:00I think it would be very difficult to justify the ...I think it would be very difficult to justify the statement that smoking embodies 'pure pleasure'. It clearly performs many positive functions such as increasing social cohesion, promoting group identity and feeling of belonging. <BR/><BR/>I am also very much down with the smoking flirtation theory. When I started university, my halls of residence had just become non-smoking. <BR/><BR/>The steps outside provided an excellent meeting place where you could be quite sure there would be people to talk to. If you ever experience the phenomenon of asking another smoker for a lighter, it is a simple gesture of friendliness that is probably unreplicated anywhere else in London<BR/><BR/>Standing outside together in the cold also generates that feeling of shared suffering - hence it becomes hard to leave 'team smokers'.<BR/><BR/>Of course, most people would find it silly for you to be standing outside in the cold if you didn't smoke, so if you want to justify your presence there, you have to smoke. Because you regularly see these people in a way that involves no awkward prior organisation, they become your friends and you all carry on smoking together (because you always smoked, right?). <BR/><BR/>If smoking was for pure pleasure (and I don't think smoking intrinsically provides that much pleasure), smokers wouldn't care where they smoked. They'd be smoking alone in ditches and park benches like heroin addicts.<BR/><BR/>All in all, well done government, you have provided a very powerful incentive for young people to take up smoking.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-4730673372906786772007-07-08T10:53:00.000+01:002007-07-08T10:53:00.000+01:00Stop evading my questions, David. Do drive? Do you...<I>Stop evading my questions, David. Do drive? Do you fly? If so, you damage the health of children by doing so. Yet you scapegoat smokers.<BR/><BR/>What hypocrisy.<BR/><BR/>Auntie Flo' </I><BR/><BR/>Your argument is the common argument put up by smokers and it holds no water.<BR/><BR/>1) Yes I drive out of necessity, smoking is purely for pleasure.<BR/><BR/>2) Driving is in the open, smoking by parents is in a contained house from which children have no choice to leave.<BR/><BR/>3) The most harmful chemicals such as lead have been taken out of petrol, whereas the most harmful chemicals of cigarettes are of its very essence.<BR/><BR/>4) Stating hypocrisy is such a weak argument and is employed by those who can't be bothered to argue the facts. Everything is hypocritical if you apply your rationale. Politics and society is a debate about compromises. I breathe CO2 into the air, does that mean I can't campaign against Global Warming.<BR/><BR/>What idiocy.<BR/><BR/>If you can't be bothered to argue the facts then I'm done with this debate.David Anthonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08240242801763405583noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-67855275460021849982007-07-08T09:08:00.000+01:002007-07-08T09:08:00.000+01:00Little Black Sambo said... "When is the revolution...Little Black Sambo said... <BR/>"When is the revolution going to start?"<BR/><BR/>This is England, Sambo. You'll have to wait two or three decades.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-26232682148046993152007-07-08T00:35:00.000+01:002007-07-08T00:35:00.000+01:00David Anthony said... Auntie Flo said... "Do you d...David Anthony said... <BR/><BR/>Auntie Flo said... "Do you drive, David? Do you fly? I bet you do. What hypocrisy. <BR/><BR/>Not at all...Forgive me for being more concerned about the health of innocent children than that of the smokers' right to have a fag in front of Eastenders.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Stop evading my questions, David. Do drive? Do you fly? If so, you damage the health of children by doing so. Yet you scapegoat smokers.<BR/><BR/>What hypocrisy.<BR/><BR/>Auntie Flo'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-37377634063269072292007-07-07T23:59:00.000+01:002007-07-07T23:59:00.000+01:00What nonsense from Norfolk Blogger and Nick O Teen...What nonsense from Norfolk Blogger and Nick O Teen (fnarr fnarr). I'm not really sure what his point was, but having once smoked and now not smoking doesn't make one any happier about illiberal, woolly and degrading laws being used to coerce a population into losing its liberty, particularly not when it's pretty clear to those of us who don't have the fortune to live in posh enclaves that the main target of this illiberal measure is the working class. I do really detest mawkish sentimentality, pseudo-science and feeble reasoning being used to beat the people in our country who work hardest for the least. You work on the roads all day and now you can't have a smoke with your pint. Well done Liberals! Well done Socialists! If Jarvis Cocker hadn't existed we would have had to invent him.<BR/><BR/>I won't rehearse all the arguments about private property because they're so <B>obviously</B> correct, nor the rubbish that alchohol won't be next -- it is starting already, or haven't you noticed? The class of people best represented by Liberal Democrats *exist* to ban things. They just started with smoking because so few people do it and most of us who don't do it must admit that we don't like the smell from those who do -- hence easy target!<BR/><BR/>Just one last point. If the health effects of smoking are so appalling that they outweigh the rights of adults to decide for themselves how to act, why didn't you gutless control freaks make smoking illegal?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-53809144224143972342007-07-07T15:23:00.000+01:002007-07-07T15:23:00.000+01:00"David Anthony said... Personally, I'd ban smok...<I>"David Anthony said...<BR/><BR/> Personally, I'd ban smoking from any household with children in it. I'd don't see why we should protect pub-goers and bar staff more than we protect babies and children, on whom passive smoking has a far more damaging and long term effect..."</I><BR/><BR/>Proof positive that the nonsense touted as "science" in Blair's Britain is accepted far too uncritically.<BR/><BR/>Might I suggest that you take a look at the W.H.O. 1998 Cohort study on Environmental Tobacco Smoke. This was one of the largest studies ever done on the subject of "second-hand smoke" and only managed to produce one, even vaguely, statistically-significant result... Which was for children who were exposed to ETS - and who had a *lower incidence* of "smoking-related illnesses" in later life.<BR/><BR/>I'm a life-long non-smoker but I'm far more annoyed by seeing junk-science used to justify repressive legislation than I am by going home from the pub with my clothes a bit smelly.Pogohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10812765444160924585noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-11780866940958653222007-07-07T14:04:00.000+01:002007-07-07T14:04:00.000+01:00Aunti Flo',The smell of alcohol makes me, and many...Aunti Flo',<BR/><BR/><EM>The smell of alcohol makes me, and many others, want to heave.</EM><BR/><BR/>If you can think of a practical way to enable drinkers and non-drinkers both to be able to go out for a drink and not have the other group's habit inflicted on them, then I will support it. Or is this (oxy)moronic? The contradiction demonstrates that your comparison is irrelevant.<BR/><BR/><EM>Ditto drunks - also the trail of destruction drunks leave on our roads.</EM><BR/><BR/>Which is illegal.<BR/><BR/><EM>Fumes from cars pollute the air and cause huge damage to health.</EM><BR/><BR/>And we constrain people's freedom to pollute by banning the use of lead in petrol, and requiring manufacturers to produce vehicles that meet emissions-limits for CO, NOx and particulates. Should we not?<BR/><BR/><EM>Planes shower all of us with particles of numerous highly dangerous carcinogens.</EM><BR/><BR/>And living is guaranteed to bring you closer to the end of your life. So your answer to the inevitability and ubiquity of threats to our welfare is that we should never act to try to ameliorate those threats?<BR/><BR/>In case you didn't read properly the post to which you replied, let me state again that I oppose a full smoking ban, but support the use of the licensing regime to provide smoking and non-smoking pubs. I place no reliance on the health impacts which most smokers seem to want to use as their straw man - you can do whatever you like to your own body, and I am not opposed to inhaling your smoke on grounds of the impact on my health, but on the basis of the physical discomfort it causes me. I am not trying to take away your freedom to smoke, or to go into a pub (if you can stand the smell) and smoke. I am simply asking to have the opportunity to go for a drink without having to inhale other people's smoke. <BR/><BR/>Almost all of the comments opposing a ban have not stated whether they would support a compromise. The implication of their failure to propose this option is that they simply want the ban overturned and would not offer a compromise to non-smokers. If that is the position of most of you, then you had the ban coming to you, even though it's wrong.bgpriorhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00628170401069060830noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-46512279110060862602007-07-07T13:30:00.000+01:002007-07-07T13:30:00.000+01:00What this proves is that the smoking ban is, despi...What this proves is that the smoking ban is, despite all the lies about passive smoking being a health risk, absolutely nothing to do with health.<BR/><BR/>It is a purely illiberal vindictive ban by the politically correct (which includes the "liberal" democrats as a party).<BR/><BR/>Chuck was smoking out of the window. Whatever the legal position & perhaps his opinion may be more informed than that of the transport police, the fact is that this does not inflict the "danger" on anybody else.neil craighttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09157898238945726349noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-22682815041198904952007-07-07T13:08:00.000+01:002007-07-07T13:08:00.000+01:00Auntie Flo said... "Do you drive, David? Do you fl...Auntie Flo said... "<I>Do you drive, David? Do you fly? I bet you do. What hypocrisy. </I><BR/><BR/>Not at all. Smoking is for pure pleasure and it is harming and shortening the life expectancy of millions of young children who are forced to inhale the smoke of their parents.<BR/><BR/>Forgive me for being more concerned about the health of innocent children than that of the smokers' right to have a fag in front of Eastenders.<BR/><BR/>It's hypocritical to ban parents from giving their children a fag to smoke but allowing them to let their children smoke the equivalent of hundreds of fags every year through passive smoking.David Anthonyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08240242801763405583noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-84931114248210156912007-07-07T11:30:00.000+01:002007-07-07T11:30:00.000+01:00Banning smoking would not be a logical response to...Banning smoking would not be a logical response to concerns over its health effects. That would be an example of legislation by wishful thinking, rather than legislation through consideration of the likely outcome.<BR/><BR/>It is already the case that perhaps 20% of cigarettes smoked in the UK are contraband or counterfeit. This results in even greater health risks to those smoking unregulated cigarettes, the criminalisation of million of people and billions of pounds being diverted from the public coffers to the criminal economy.<BR/><BR/>It is worth noting again that there is still no convincing evidence of the dangers of passive smoking - none of the surveys that purport to demonstrate it is robust. This legislation is another example of the dangers of over-bearing government, which results in rule-making based on prejudice not principle.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-68295258779872690982007-07-07T10:47:00.000+01:002007-07-07T10:47:00.000+01:00I'm SO bored by Charlie K- another self-important ...I'm SO bored by Charlie K- another self-important preening gormless jock. Can we have a Charlie K free-zone please?!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-40863418278017579352007-07-07T10:34:00.000+01:002007-07-07T10:34:00.000+01:00As a non-smoker I am dismayed about this smoking b...As a non-smoker I am dismayed about this smoking ban. I understand all the arguments about smoking - and would not smoke myself.<BR/><BR/>If publicans wish to allow smoking in their Pubs -'Alright', I say. I don't have to go into that Pub. As other have commented, a Pub is private property.<BR/><BR/>I am not my brothers' keeper - unlike those who aspire to be spies for the little Hitlers and their dictats.<BR/><BR/>Ironic that Gordo wants you all to support the Mafia by gambling.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-64660163422156639752007-07-07T10:23:00.000+01:002007-07-07T10:23:00.000+01:00Irrespective of whether you believe in the justice...Irrespective of whether you believe in the justice of the smoking ban or not from 1 July it is an offence to smoke in a public place etc etc and you have to question the judgement of any leading politician or public figure who would actually break the said law in an extremely public place, on a train of all places, and then lamely claim that by blowing the smoke out of the window he was somehow exempt from said lawAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-11879484819331570912007-07-07T01:01:00.000+01:002007-07-07T01:01:00.000+01:00from wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smokin...from wikipedia:<BR/>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smoking_ban<BR/><BR/>Studies in Ireland and Scotland have already shown that the percentage of smokers in the country has increased since the passage of the smoking ban with changing habits due to the ban having led to creating new smokers.<BR/><BR/>Contributing to the increase in the number of smokers is the flirtation practice of smirting, a ritual of flirting outside pubs using cigarettes as the social piece to do so.<BR/><BR/>( i can vouch for that, having been in Ireland recently and seeing this for myself. if your a youngster and want to chat up a girl - the best place for it is now *outside* the pub, away from the blaring music... )Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-23424302204202663912007-07-07T00:57:00.000+01:002007-07-07T00:57:00.000+01:00i'm against the ban - mostly because if the govern...i'm against the ban - mostly because if the government gets away with this, then they'll want to ban something else.<BR/><BR/>give them an inch, they'll take a mile<BR/><BR/>funnily enough, i think it was the U.S state of New Hampshire , which has a strong vocal libertarian lobby, that recently voted down a smoking ban.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-75988087854944670072007-07-07T00:51:00.000+01:002007-07-07T00:51:00.000+01:00"Its about showing us who is the BOSS."English Dem..."Its about showing us who is the BOSS."<BR/>English Democrat, you are spot on. These no-smoking signs that are now EVERYWHERE are a constant reminder of our servile status. When is the revolution going to start?Little Black Sambohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16699227938165106710noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-57977600401131139052007-07-07T00:46:00.000+01:002007-07-07T00:46:00.000+01:00nic o'tean said:And that is the killer. Will power...nic o'tean said:<BR/><BR/>And that is the killer. Will power. The people whingeing on about their "rights" as smokers are out of arguments. What they are in denial about is their inability to face giving up - and that irritates them to death. Literally. <BR/><BR/><BR/>I take it that you have given up health damaging, oil squandering, planet destroying, atmosphere polluting, car driving and flying, nic o'tean?<BR/><BR/>No? You haven't? Unable to face giving up?<BR/><BR/>What hypocrisy.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-52587491686598686532007-07-07T00:40:00.000+01:002007-07-07T00:40:00.000+01:00David Anthony said... Personally, I'd ban smoking ...David Anthony said... <BR/><BR/>Personally, I'd ban smoking from any household with children in it.<BR/><BR/>Health visitors advise parents of babies not to take them for walks near roads because car fumes damage their lungs.<BR/><BR/>Millions of children who live near busy roads are exposed to such damage every day. Ditto the millions of children who live near airports.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Do you drive, David? Do you fly? I bet you do. What hypocrisy.<BR/><BR/>Auntie Flo'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-31993737504678671902007-07-07T00:30:00.000+01:002007-07-07T00:30:00.000+01:00bgprior said:it is the infliction of physical disc...bgprior said:<BR/><BR/>it is the infliction of physical discomfort on another that is disallowed, and that should apply as much to smoking as to punching.<BR/><BR/><BR/>The smell of alcohol makes me, and many others, want to heave. Ditto drunks - also the trail of destruction drunks leave on our roads. Fumes from cars pollute the air and cause huge damage to health. Planes shower all of us with particles of numerous highly dangerous carcinogens. <BR/><BR/>And the taxpayer subsidises aviation industry as well as picking up the tab for the health damage of all of the above .<BR/><BR/>Smokers are being scapegoated and criminalised by an anti-smoking lobby which is largely comprised of a bunch of health damaging hypocrites. <BR/><BR/>Auntie Flo'<BR/><BR/><BR/><BR/>Tough.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-89516438744321983822007-07-07T00:28:00.000+01:002007-07-07T00:28:00.000+01:00I am astonished how ill-informed some posters are ...I am astonished how ill-informed some posters are about smoking and related issues, when I would have thought that the facts are beyond dispute.<BR/><BR/>Smoking is causes cancer, deformaties in unborn babies, costs the NHS millions and kills more people than Osama Bin Laden could dream about. It is addictive and economically ruinous to people on low incomes. <BR/><BR/>The tobacco companies need to open up new markets in places like China and Africa just to replace the people they have killed in Western Europe.<BR/><BR/>And God knows how much working time is wasted by people having to leave their places of work every half hour to feed their habit. People who then want to shroud your restaurant/pub/club in their own stink.<BR/><BR/>Honestly, it's a no-brainer.<BR/><BR/>As for Charlie - isn't it sad? He is an alcoholic and a nicotine addict. His brilliant career has now been blighted by these two demons. On top of that he has now joined the Paris Hilton school of citizenship which espouses the belief that the rules are for the little people.<BR/><BR/>How much public sympathy can there be for a man whose evident lack of basic will power renders him unfit for high office? <BR/><BR/>And that is the killer. Will power. The people whingeing on about their "rights" as smokers are out of arguments. What they are in denial about is their inability to face giving up - and that irritates them to death. Literally.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-32394468978322643702007-07-06T23:37:00.000+01:002007-07-06T23:37:00.000+01:00And his excuse, when approached by police at the e...And his excuse, when approached by police at the end of the journey? He thought it was still perfectly legal - because he was leaning out the window.<BR/><BR/><BR/>And this is a fella who voted for the ban!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6214838.post-1955583463266551572007-07-06T23:19:00.000+01:002007-07-06T23:19:00.000+01:00Are you not sick and tired of preople telling you ...Are you not sick and tired of preople telling you what not eat, dont drink, dont smoke dont do this dont do that.<BR/><BR/>Just leave us alone and get on with your own life. <BR/><BR/>Am pleased to report local pub has inside room where you can smoke your head off if you want. These will be springing up all over the place in local communities where we please ourselves.Johnny Norfolkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16900659617233793880noreply@blogger.com